Nikola Jokic - 23-24 NBA Thread - 23 Finals NBA MVP

[OhayoKD]

I'll co-sign this, but I want to emphasize that "racist" has become such an inflammatory word that applying it correctly can get in the way of understanding.

What's happening here is that there's a dominant majority - Black Americans - who are seeing their dominance challenged by the globalization of the game, and like many dominant majorities that feel threatened, they are acting out in an emotionally biased way.

This is something that White people did with Black basketball players back in the day, and it's also something that short people did with tall people - bemoaning that there wouldn't be a place for short people in the future of pro basketball...and of course they were basically right.

So on a broad level, this is something we should expect, and not something to get the pitchforks out about.

Now, do I wish Perk & SAS didn't exist in the basketball space? Yes, but it's not because they have this Black American defensiveness so much as the fact they are all about courting controversy and using emotional tone and argumentation to get attention for themselves. There are stories, for example, of SAS talking on the phone rathe than watching the first half of a game, and then coming in at halftime doing his schtick where he basically just comments on the box score relying upon his style to make it look like he has some authority on what he's saying. For someone like that to be the most highly paid basketball commentator in the world is just plain bad for the game, and for Perk to be able to come in, copy that approach, and have success, is infuriating.

How can a league with 29/30~ white owners, mostly white coaches and mostly white award voters and media talking heads be black dominated?

I'm talking about basketball generally not about the NBA.

The game of basketball has been dominated by Black Americans beginning with Bill Russell.

From a business perspective, of course its dominated by Whites at the top. All American industries are.

I would say the most powerful figures in basketball being predominantly white calls into question the significance of that distinction.

[Peregrine01]

I personally attribute it to the generations of systemic inequality and oppression, but yeah, ESPN not censoring Kendrick Perkins for saying there might be white bias in MVP voting is pretty high up there.

I know that you're being facetious again but perhaps I could've explained what I meant better.

MLK's dream was for people to treat each other without regard for the color of their skin - when that premise is violated and clear and obviously racist behavior is perpetuated widely and aren't checked, it first creates resentment among the afflicted group. But resentment isn't something that goes away. It feeds on itself and grows, fostering an "us versus them" worldview which leads to a race to the bottom where members of each "team" retreats into their own tribes, driving divisions ever larger. Politicians on both sides exploit these feelings of resentment and disenfrachisement. Just look at Trump.

[Doctor MJ]

How can a league with 29/30~ white owners, mostly white coaches and mostly white award voters and media talking heads be black dominated?

I'm talking about basketball generally not about the NBA.

The game of basketball has been dominated by Black Americans beginning with Bill Russell.

From a business perspective, of course its dominated by Whites at the top. All American industries are.

I would say the most powerful figures in basketball being predominantly white calls into question the significance of that distinction.

Honestly, I don't believe that this distinction is in any way hard for people to understand. When basketball is called a Black-dominated sport, even little kids understand why. It feels like both you guys are using considerable brainpower to find a way to be confused over something that basically no one is actually confused about.

If you want to talk about the dynamics of super-rich white men behind the scenes making tons of money in literally every industry in the US and how that interacts with the fact that in this case the stars of the sports have been predominantly black for well over half a century, we can, but there's no real confusion between these two things.

[falcolombardi]

I'm talking about basketball generally not about the NBA.

The game of basketball has been dominated by Black Americans beginning with Bill Russell.

From a business perspective, of course its dominated by Whites at the top. All American industries are.

I would say the most powerful figures in basketball being predominantly white calls into question the significance of that distinction.

Honestly, I don't believe that this distinction is in any way hard for people to understand. When basketball is called a Black-dominated sport, even little kids understand why. It feels like both you guys are using considerable brainpower to find a way to be confused over something that basically no one is actually confused about.

If you want to talk about the dynamics of super-rich white men behind the scenes making tons of money in literally every industry in the US and how that interacts with the fact that in this case the stars of the sports have been predominantly black for well over half a century, we can, but there's no real confusion between these two things.

But this discussion literally started about how a member of the predominantly white sports media supossedly ruined jokic mvp campaing in 2023 for being white

So yes, whether the media/ award voters of this league are white definetely matters in the topic of jokic being or not "robbed" for being white because a majority of players are black"

If you guys believe perkins was the king maker who decided the mvp race so be it, it still was not voted in by resentful black players like your comment about a threatened majority suggested

The majority black players were not the ones voting for embiid over jokic in the first place for them to be doing out of resentment at a white guy winning mvp

[McBubbles]

Now, do I wish Perk & SAS didn't exist in the basketball space? Yes, but it's not because they have this Black American defensiveness so much as the fact they are all about courting controversy and using emotional tone and argumentation to get attention for themselves. There are stories, for example, of SAS talking on the phone rathe than watching the first half of a game, and then coming in at halftime doing his schtick where he basically just comments on the box score relying upon his style to make it look like he has some authority on what he's saying. For someone like that to be the most highly paid basketball commentator in the world is just plain bad for the game, and for Perk to be able to come in, copy that approach, and have success, is infuriating.

If something's blatantly wrong, it should be called out. ESPN and its parent Disney has portrayed itself as a paragon of virtue and morality and enabled outright racist behavior. We should reserve the same animus toward this kind of stuff if it happened to be about a white player just like we would if it was about a black player. The problem of why we don't in this country is a big reason for the strained race issues that we have IMO.

Why? Not asking sarcastically, and not saying I disagree, just curious. I ask because I don't think all double standards are unjustifiable. Should a woman making a bad joke about beating up her husband receive as much outrage as vice versa? Should an ethnically Jewish person saying something bad about German's be received the same as the reverse? Considering the history of race relations in America, should a black American man being racist and dumb towards a white American man illicit an equal reaction to the reverse?

[NbaAllDay]

Now, do I wish Perk & SAS didn't exist in the basketball space? Yes, but it's not because they have this Black American defensiveness so much as the fact they are all about courting controversy and using emotional tone and argumentation to get attention for themselves. There are stories, for example, of SAS talking on the phone rathe than watching the first half of a game, and then coming in at halftime doing his schtick where he basically just comments on the box score relying upon his style to make it look like he has some authority on what he's saying. For someone like that to be the most highly paid basketball commentator in the world is just plain bad for the game, and for Perk to be able to come in, copy that approach, and have success, is infuriating.

If something's blatantly wrong, it should be called out. ESPN and its parent Disney has portrayed itself as a paragon of virtue and morality and enabled outright racist behavior. We should reserve the same animus toward this kind of stuff if it happened to be about a white player just like we would if it was about a black player. The problem of why we don't in this country is a big reason for the strained race issues that we have IMO.

Why? Not asking sarcastically, and not saying I disagree, just curious. I ask because I don't think all double standards are unjustifiable. Should a woman making a bad joke about beating up her husband receive as much outrage as vice versa? Should an ethnically Jewish person saying something bad about German's be received the same as the reverse? Considering the history of race relations in America, should a black American man being racist and dumb towards a white American man illicit an equal reaction to the reverse?

Well yes.

The vast majority of people in today's society have nothing to do with the past relations and/or shouldn't be swept into the same boat and therefore pretending that as an 'x race' you as an individual are either less or more justified to be racist or be the victim goes completely against the individual rights we all 'should' have.

[NbaAllDay]

In fact many cultural have gone so far as to believe they can't be racist or bigoted to others because of their history and that is some scary kind of mental gymnastics.

[Doctor MJ]

I would say the most powerful figures in basketball being predominantly white calls into question the significance of that distinction.

Honestly, I don't believe that this distinction is in any way hard for people to understand. When basketball is called a Black-dominated sport, even little kids understand why. It feels like both you guys are using considerable brainpower to find a way to be confused over something that basically no one is actually confused about.

If you want to talk about the dynamics of super-rich white men behind the scenes making tons of money in literally every industry in the US and how that interacts with the fact that in this case the stars of the sports have been predominantly black for well over half a century, we can, but there's no real confusion between these two things.

But this discussion literally started about how a member of the predominantly white sports media supossedly ruined jokic mvp campaing in 2023 for being white

So yes, whether the media/ award voters of this league are white definetely matters in the topic of jokic being or not "robbed" for being white because a majority of players are black"

If you guys believe perkins was the king maker who decided the mvp race so be it, it still was not voted in by resentful black players like your comment about a threatened majority suggested

The majority black players were not the ones voting for embiid over jokic in the first place for them to be doing out of resentment at a white guy winning mvp

I would suggest you focus on what I said when looking to reply to me, rather than projecting other things others said on to me.

I will say that the set of events that led to Embiid beating Jokic for MVP was complex, and I think it's naive to think that the racial antagonism didn't play a part, but that wasn't what I was looking to comment on. I was looking to speak about something more broad that's happening as a result of the globalization of the game that shouldn't be seen as unexpected given human nature.

[OhayoKD]

Now, do I wish Perk & SAS didn't exist in the basketball space? Yes, but it's not because they have this Black American defensiveness so much as the fact they are all about courting controversy and using emotional tone and argumentation to get attention for themselves. There are stories, for example, of SAS talking on the phone rathe than watching the first half of a game, and then coming in at halftime doing his schtick where he basically just comments on the box score relying upon his style to make it look like he has some authority on what he's saying. For someone like that to be the most highly paid basketball commentator in the world is just plain bad for the game, and for Perk to be able to come in, copy that approach, and have success, is infuriating.

If something's blatantly wrong, it should be called out. ESPN and its parent Disney has portrayed itself as a paragon of virtue and morality and enabled outright racist behavior. We should reserve the same animus toward this kind of stuff if it happened to be about a white player just like we would if it was about a black player. The problem of why we don't in this country is a big reason for the strained race issues that we have IMO.

Why? Not asking sarcastically, and not saying I disagree, just curious. I ask because I don't think all double standards are unjustifiable. Should a woman making a bad joke about beating up her husband receive as much outrage as vice versa? Should an ethnically Jewish person saying something bad about German's be received the same as the reverse? Considering the history of race relations in America, should a black American man being racist and dumb towards a white American man illicit an equal reaction to the reverse?

I'm also still not really sure what the basis for there being more animus towards racism towards black nba players is.

[lessthanjake]

I really do think the race element here was ancillary to what was going on. It really was mostly “We shouldn’t give a third-straight MVP to a guy who has never even made the Finals and only even made the conference finals once.” At most, the race element may have underscored the importance of that angle for people. As in, some people may have felt like there were a number of black players that had achieved much more in the game than Jokic had (guys like Jordan, LeBron, Kareem, etc.), and yet they’d not won three in a row. The fact that the one person to win three in a row post-merger was Larry Bird—who, as great as he was, was not greater than a handful of all-time greats that never won three in a row—probably made the issue feel even more racialized for some people. Basically, I think some people might’ve felt like it seemed like, if Jokic won, the bar for how great a player needed to be to get the historic achievement of winning three MVPs in a row was lower for a white player than a black player. At bottom, though, I think this is basically just ancillary window-dressing on the “This guy hasn’t proven he’s great enough to have won three straight MVPs” feeling. I think that was the main animating thing there, and I imagine the vast majority of people who had that sort of sentiment didn't really layer on the racial element to it.

[OhayoKD]

I personally attribute it to the generations of systemic inequality and oppression, but yeah, ESPN not censoring Kendrick Perkins for saying there might be white bias in MVP voting is pretty high up there.

I know that you're being facetious again but perhaps I could've explained what I meant better.

MLK's dream was for people to treat each other without regard for the color of their skin - when that premise is violated and clear and obviously racist behavior is perpetuated widely and aren't checked, it first creates resentment among the afflicted group. But resentment isn't something that goes away. It feeds on itself and grows, fostering an "us versus them" worldview which leads to a race to the bottom where members of each "team" retreats into their own tribes, driving divisions ever larger. Politicians on both sides exploit these feelings of resentment and disenfrachisement. Just look at Trump.

To be clear, do you also think ESPN should have censored Bob Costas?

[Peregrine01]

I personally attribute it to the generations of systemic inequality and oppression, but yeah, ESPN not censoring Kendrick Perkins for saying there might be white bias in MVP voting is pretty high up there.

I know that you're being facetious again but perhaps I could've explained what I meant better.

MLK's dream was for people to treat each other without regard for the color of their skin - when that premise is violated and clear and obviously racist behavior is perpetuated widely and aren't checked, it first creates resentment among the afflicted group. But resentment isn't something that goes away. It feeds on itself and grows, fostering an "us versus them" worldview which leads to a race to the bottom where members of each "team" retreats into their own tribes, driving divisions ever larger. Politicians on both sides exploit these feelings of resentment and disenfrachisement. Just look at Trump.

To be clear, do you also think ESPN should have censored Bob Costas?

Distasteful and insensitive, yes. And he would've for sure been cancelled today for those comments. But that was not even remotely the same as Perkins dog-whistling that 3 white players are undeserving of MVPs but won them because they are white.

[Peregrine01]

Now, do I wish Perk & SAS didn't exist in the basketball space? Yes, but it's not because they have this Black American defensiveness so much as the fact they are all about courting controversy and using emotional tone and argumentation to get attention for themselves. There are stories, for example, of SAS talking on the phone rathe than watching the first half of a game, and then coming in at halftime doing his schtick where he basically just comments on the box score relying upon his style to make it look like he has some authority on what he's saying. For someone like that to be the most highly paid basketball commentator in the world is just plain bad for the game, and for Perk to be able to come in, copy that approach, and have success, is infuriating.

If something's blatantly wrong, it should be called out. ESPN and its parent Disney has portrayed itself as a paragon of virtue and morality and enabled outright racist behavior. We should reserve the same animus toward this kind of stuff if it happened to be about a white player just like we would if it was about a black player. The problem of why we don't in this country is a big reason for the strained race issues that we have IMO.

Why? Not asking sarcastically, and not saying I disagree, just curious. I ask because I don't think all double standards are unjustifiable. Should a woman making a bad joke about beating up her husband receive as much outrage as vice versa? Should an ethnically Jewish person saying something bad about German's be received the same as the reverse? Considering the history of race relations in America, should a black American man being racist and dumb towards a white American man illicit an equal reaction to the reverse?

Fundamentally, people believe in fairness and equality of treatment. So on balance, no I don't believe that double standards lead to a better society.

[AEnigma]

Facetious paraphrase: just like it is fair and equal to forbid both the rich and poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets, and steal bread.

[McBubbles]

If something's blatantly wrong, it should be called out. ESPN and its parent Disney has portrayed itself as a paragon of virtue and morality and enabled outright racist behavior. We should reserve the same animus toward this kind of stuff if it happened to be about a white player just like we would if it was about a black player. The problem of why we don't in this country is a big reason for the strained race issues that we have IMO.

Why? Not asking sarcastically, and not saying I disagree, just curious. I ask because I don't think all double standards are unjustifiable. Should a woman making a bad joke about beating up her husband receive as much outrage as vice versa? Should an ethnically Jewish person saying something bad about German's be received the same as the reverse? Considering the history of race relations in America, should a black American man being racist and dumb towards a white American man illicit an equal reaction to the reverse?

Well yes.

The vast majority of people in today's society have nothing to do with the past relations and/or shouldn't be swept into the same boat and therefore pretending that as an 'x race' you as an individual are either less or more justified to be racist or be the victim goes completely against the individual rights we all 'should' have.

You're talking about whether or not the moral condemnation should be equivalent, I'm moreso talking about social outrage.

Also I'm surprised this thread hasn't been locked lol.

[Mickey8]

In one situation in the fourth quarter. Jokic was held by AD with one hand around his waist , preventing Jokic to move and his shot was blocked with the other AD's hand, clearly a foul. While there was the replay running , that idiot who was "managing" GS and for some reason is commentating the play off games this season without any shame was complimenting AD defense as great and adding how Jokic was complaining for the clearly great defense by AD ESPN policy is to crap on Jokic all the time , what a sad network they really are.

[Mickey8]

Kenny the racist still sighed when Jokic was mentioned as the MVP candidate and at the fact that Ernie have voted for him.

Warned for trolling - CF

[Mickey8]

Salty bunch on TNT as well. We appreciate Jokic, he's not better than Shaq,Olajuwon,Wilt,Russell. He would have gotten killed by Shaq. What a trashy commenting at the beginning of the play off's, they are throwing the shade, low key. They know if Denver some how wins the title this season and Jokic is the MVP again, there will be lots of talk where Jokic belongs in the NBA history and there are a lot nervousness in the mainstream media.

[penbeast0]

Now, do I wish Perk & SAS didn't exist in the basketball space? Yes, but it's not because they have this Black American defensiveness so much as the fact they are all about courting controversy and using emotional tone and argumentation to get attention for themselves. There are stories, for example, of SAS talking on the phone rathe than watching the first half of a game, and then coming in at halftime doing his schtick where he basically just comments on the box score relying upon his style to make it look like he has some authority on what he's saying. For someone like that to be the most highly paid basketball commentator in the world is just plain bad for the game, and for Perk to be able to come in, copy that approach, and have success, is infuriating.

If something's blatantly wrong, it should be called out. ESPN and its parent Disney has portrayed itself as a paragon of virtue and morality and enabled outright racist behavior. We should reserve the same animus toward this kind of stuff if it happened to be about a white player just like we would if it was about a black player. The problem of why we don't in this country is a big reason for the strained race issues that we have IMO.

Why? Not asking sarcastically, and not saying I disagree, just curious. I ask because I don't think all double standards are unjustifiable. Should a woman making a bad joke about beating up her husband receive as much outrage as vice versa? Should an ethnically Jewish person saying something bad about German's be received the same as the reverse? Considering the history of race relations in America, should a black American man being racist and dumb towards a white American man illicit an equal reaction to the reverse?

I don't think you are asking the right question. Should it be an EQUAL reaction, probably not. There is history that slants the playing field and that history shouldn't be ignored.

Should it be condemned? Yes. If a woman makes trivializes domestic violence with a bad joke, if a Jewish person attacks all Germans as anti-Semitic, if a black man is making comments that are stupid and based on racial stereotyping of white people, it should absolutely be condemned.

So, yes condemn the stupidity, ignorance, and prejudice but with the understanding of context and history.

[TroubleS0me]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter