Interesting question DJ and while i'm sure for some people, race may play a role in judging the "athletism" of players , I'm doubt thats true for the majority of people. Since I dont know most of those players you listed I'll just try to answer your question with the ones I do know. Neither Morrison or Reddick would be considered "athletic." I'm defining "athletic" in terms of quickness, speed, strength and jumping ability relative to their positions or players their size in the NBA. While I consider Morrison ok athletically in college in terms of strength, size, quickness in the NBA he will be adequate at best and more likely subpar "athletically". Just by listing some of the small forwards in the WESTconf reveals this to be true: Odom, Marion, T-mac, Miles, Battier, Dirk, Maggette, Carmelo, Kirenko, David West, Rashard Lewis etc Nearly every player on that list is faster, has better lateral movement, jumps higher, jumps faster, is stronger AND is Bigger for the most part than Morrison. In short Morrison is not going to be an overly athletic nba forward... but niether was alot of great/good players in the NBA... so he may still become a very good player despite of it. Reddick on the other hand is a much WORST case than Morrison as he is not only going to be at a speed and strength disadvantage in the NBA... he is going to be at a severe size advantage. While Morrison will be for the most part average in terms of height and size compared to other small forwards, Reddick will be far shorter in addition to being far slower than most shooting guards in the league. In regards to the question of the black players, though I havent watch much of their games, I've watched enough of Thomas, Noah, Aldridge and Gay to call them "athletically gifted" players. Not only do they have size and speed, they also have leaping ability, strength and quckness superior to the avearage players of their size. I dont consider Sheldon Williams athletic especially in the NBA. Like LSU's Big Baby, his main physical attribute is strength, though he does have adequate size.
1) call it racist or stereotypical or whatever the hell u want.. it is a fact black people TEND to be more athletic... OK OK sorry, let me rephrase it so its more politically correct... there TENDS to be more black people that are athletic... THAT MUCH is TRUE... so i think its closer to being a FACT than being a STEREOTYPE... 2) by athletic i mean, quickness, speed, mobility, and jumping ability.. not the swift snap of the wrist that comes with jump shooting
Morrison at #1 would be a mistake. The kid is a good shooter and plays w/ a lot of heart, but for this team, who plays SG? Most of us will agree that we don't want TMac playing SG, Morrison will have his trouble guarding SFs, let alone. We would have to go w/ Aldridge. We are still in need of a PF that rebound and defend, LaMarcus and Yao could be a pretty good duo in the paint. His jumper has improved, he has really good form on his shot, he can rebound the ball, and has good timing on defense.
it was rhetorical, dumba$$. everyone who reads the post is supposed to answer the question for themself, and their answers will usually follow based on this whole 'athletic' perception. i agree for the most part with your analysis of reddick and others; but the point is that there is a tendency to sell white players short on 'athletic' ability. scott padgett and juwan both seem to have equal athletic ability [padgett has more, IMHO], but the point is that there are some people that are more ready/likely to concede that juwan is athletic than they are to concede that padgett is. it's just a theory about something i've noticed the last couple years. it's not an effin' law of the universe. so relax. this isn't CRASH.
For No.1 pick, big guys are good choice. Even if their performance lower than expectation in draft, they still earns potential and it'll be easy to be traded for player in other position. So I chose for Aldridge for No.1 pick. If no.2 or 3 it'll be hard job to chose TT or Gay.
If you think the statement you made that I was replying to then you should truly look in the mirror before you accuse others of being a "dumbass." Here's your "rhetorical" statement. That is not a rhetorical statement, but rather a presumptive statement. While your initial post may constitute as a rhetorical question the second post above, the one I quoted and was replying to is in no way indicative of a being rhetorical. If you fail to see that perhaps you should look up the definition of rhetorical. Yes your initial post which I replied to with the analysis of reddick and others was rhetorical and thus I answer as so, however my second reply was to your second post which were not rhetorical but rather statements of presumption and opinion. No one is debating that bias doesnt exist however we are arguing that it is not an issue with how we personally and in fact more likely the majority view or judge a player's athletism, that there exist a few who judge soley on race is not something we care or believe is of much importance. In regards to Juwan and Padgett, neither was labeled as especially athletic coming out of college or in their nba carreer. While juwon may have had slight advantages in speed and strength over padgett the thing that most commonly defined the two was thier skill level. The fact that there exist some people out there who would characterize Juwan as an "athletic" player as compared to other players his size and position is of little significance to me as I'm sure there are some people out there who would characterize Juwan as the worst nba powerful forward in the nba the last 5 years too. Lastly I'm curious why you think I'm not relax lol. From what part of my ONE sentence which consisted of a mere 14 words none of which were insulting or of profanity did you deduced that I was upset or in any way not relax? I was just merely pointing out the obvious and if that causes you to jump to such a conclusion or to hurl insults at me... perhaps just maybe, I'm not the one who need to relax lol.
DJ, I was enjoying reading this thread and liked the discussion you started with your reply to my post. I really liked blah's first post and couldn't have said it better myself. Then came the profanity and name calling from you, a poster claiming to have been around since 02 . Basically you took an interesting adult discussion and turned it into a second grade argument. FYI... I think Aldridge is more athletic and fills more holes in our roster than Morisson and that is all my post stated, no more no less.
It couldn't be more obvious. You don't pass on LeBron for Darko/Carmello/whoever, and you don't pass on Bush for Thomas/Aldridge/whoever. It has to be Reggie Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!
well, the rockets better take a dang good player.. and btw, for mentioning Reggie Bush, wtf was wrong with the Texans ???????????????????????????????????????????????????? they passed on Reggie &Vince and for who ?? wtf????? that's just messed up, I hope that our Rockets management dont smoke that crack the Texans have...
I just realized... Houston might be a bad location for a team you root for, it's cursed or something... This the city that passed Jordan for Hakeem, traded Jefferson for EG, choked against Bills, choked against the Mavs, choked against the Jazz, set an expansion team record for lowest wins in four seasons, threw to Pujols, got swept in WS, passed Amare for Yao... And now passed Bush for Williams???????????????????? Time to switch and become a Lakers fan... jk I love the Rockets!
okay, i said the word 'dumba$$.' i concede that much. i apologize. people have said many worse things; however that is no excuse for my language. okierock - sorry to you, too. First of all, it was a rhetorical question, not a rhetorical statement. (You analyzed my post word-for-word, so I will kindly return the favor.) Maybe YOU should go to Barnes & Noble and buy yourself a dictionary. "A rhetorical question is one asked solely to produce an effect (especially to make an assertion) rather than to elicit a reply." Dictionary.com. Presumptive statements and rhetorical statements need not be exclusive. Just because something is making an assertion doesn't mean it's not rhetorical. (Maybe you didn't know that - that's okay.) And by-the-way, 'post' is a singular noun ("to your second post which were not rhetorical..."), and thus requires the proper verb would be 'was' and not 'were.' What's 'athletism?' Let me know when you get your new dictionary. If you get a chance, also look up 'soley.' I'll wait in suspense until then. That's also a run-on sentence; regardless, I will respond to that last clause. The point, again, of my original post was that it is becoming a more prevalent view that black players are more 'athletic' than comparable white players, even when it is undeserved. Just because you and I may not judge solely on race does not mean that those that do - whether consciously or subconsciously - don't constitute a substantial minority. In addition, who are you to say that 'we' don't care or believe it is of much importance that there are those that abide by that latter view? I would think that if that is a view - a growing one, at that - it should definitely be a concern that is addressed; if you don't agree, stick to using 'I' instead of 'We' next time. (Before I analyze this portion, I'm assuming you meant to type 'juwAn' and 'thEIr,' not 'juwOn' and 'thIER.') I, again, concede the last part of this section - there are, indeed, more than a few people that believe Juwan sucks as a PF. The beginning of that last sentence, however, repeats the point you just made earlier - that there may be people who believe he is more athletic, but you don't care about those people. Your analysis of the two players is accurate, but my point in bringing up those two players was that Juwan might still be seen as more athletic than Scott for no definable reason other than the fact that he is black. You're right! You're the one that needs a new dictionary. LOL. The word relax is also available in past tense ['relaxed'] and gerund form ['relaxing']. I thought I'd let you know. I'm sorry you were insulted by my calling you a 'dumba$$,' and I promise I will never use profane language towards you again. The obvious point to be made is that you shouldn't play a semantics game with someone you don't know, not whatever point you were trying to make. Please grow some thicker skin. I'm sorry, buddy, but you just got served. And, just so you know, you brought this on yourself when you disrespected me by trying to act smart by parsing my post, word-by-word. I have better things to do than teaching you English, so please let this English lesson end. This thread is about basketball; let's keep it that way. I appreciate the compliment, okie. Again, sorry for calling blah a 'dumba$$.' I felt like blah's attack on my rhetorical question was pretty pointless, un-helpful and un-informative for the thread, and simply an attempt to cut down someone [me] that he disagreed with. I do honestly hope that we can return to the normal basketball discussion and leave the semantics behind.
I couldn't let the Jordan for Hakeem pass! Thats like complaining that you got a bentley when u could have had a rolls-royce. If Olajuwon would have had his pippen with him, (2nd player) it would have been the same thing for him jk I love the Rockets![/QUOTE]
Actually I didnt analyzed your post word for word but rather, point by point, as unlike some, I dont really pay attention or care if you spelled "athletic" correctly or "juwon, juwan." Now again if you think the following statement is rhetorical, this convo is pointless. Do you really think anyone reading that would really think its a rhetorical? LOL are you serious? Ok just for kicks, "athletism" is defined by websters as, The state or practice of an athlete; the characteristics of an athlete. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=athletism And again I'm not sure if you are genuinely confused or not but I'm sure it was obvious to others I meant "solely" but yeah shame on me I'm known to mispell or use the wrong tense while writing on a message board! O I guess you got me again! I made another grammatical error! Shame! Anyhow that doesnt negate the point of my question? What made you think I wasnt "relaxed" from my 14 word 1 sentence reply? Again you are making the wrong assumptions and attributing them to me. Though you probably wont care since you seem know how I feel, but I was more amused and curious as to why my seemingly innocular one sentence post illicit such a response lol. I'd rather you reread my posts objectively than apologize as their isnt much need. I hope you'll find that I wasnt "playing a semantics game" but was rather arguing 3 main points. First, your second statement which I quoted above and was replying to was not rhetorical or at the very least not aparently so. Second, that while I agree with your general thoery some people surely do judge with that bias, I (stated "we" previosuly perhaps presumably in reference to those who responded) dont think the issue is one that is of much significance or of much impact on how the majority of fans/pros judge the athletic ability of players. Third though not really a point, I was just curious as to your offence at my one sentence reply and particular what part of it made you deduce I was in any way upset or not "relaxed." Again I'm confused lol, I just got served? I brought this upon myself? Was it a french dip sandwhich I bought? Cuz I'm actually kinda hungry. I'm not sure why you think my post or yours for that matter is some kind of "battle" nor do I understand what constitutes me being served. Was I served because I made spelling mistakes? Used the wrong tense? Used the word Athletism which for some reason you object to? And english lesson? Umm thanks for being the spell checker, I'm sure I'll probably need it for this post as well. LoL I know I need it at work. WOW again I wasnt aware I was attacking anyone or attempting to cut someone down with a ONE sentence post in which I was just pointing out the obvious. Was my statement false? Did anyone else assert that everyone you listed in the second category "athletic?" Again if you believe the statement which I was replying to was "rhetorical" ask yourself if it was so apparently so, that anyone reading it would think so. IMO the statement was not rhetorical, but apparently you disagree. Its funny how from that you deduced I was trying to "cut someone down" "playing semantics" "am a Dumba$$" "need thicker skin" "need to relax" and "got swerved!"...
blah - i'm sorry WE both opened this ludicrous can of worms. i have time to study for finals, not to spellcheck your posts. thanks for totally [absent-mindedly, i'm assuming ] forgetting that definition of a rhetorical question. here it is again: "A rhetorical question is one asked solely to produce an effect (especially to make an assertion) rather than to elicit a reply." Dictionary.com. now - does this question produce an effect? ahhh, it DOES, doesn't it. oh wait, you also made NO mention of the non-exclusivity of presumptive and rhetorical statements. just to humor you, let's say the question is presumptive, Blah - i'm trying to prove a point - a point that has been echoed off more than a few warm bodies at the law school. but note, again, that just because something is presumptive doesn't mean it isn't being asked to produce an effect, or that it REQUIRES a reply. did you ever ponder the fact that i might ask a question to make others think about HOW they think? apparently not. i'll refrain from proofreading your erroneous post again, but please start using some sort of spell-check and spare us from having to translate your blahbonics. all it takes is a copy & paste into Word. we will have to agree to disagree about whether or not the existing bias is an issue or not; both you and i recognize that that bias exists, and that's enough of a common ground for me to be done with this. please - re-read the section on rhetorical questions. it will help. and don't go into debate or law.
