<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ May 2 2007, 06:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>it's definitely got some convincing stats, here's a summary:- Players perform better in every stat except free throw shooting when playing under a referee of their own race- Teams with more black players than the other team perform better in every stat under black referees, and vice versa- Each white referee hurts the team with more minutes played by black players by an average of about 1% winning percentage- Whichever team plays black players more minutes wins only 48% of games, this is very significant since the study is across 250,000 games, so it rules out any flukes.- 76% of black referees have a lower than average statistical bias against black players. 73% of white referees have a higher than average statistical bias against black players.- players earn up to 4% fewer fouls and score up to 2.5% more points on nights in which their race matches that of the refereeing crew- coaches have a similar effect to players when it comes to ref bias- white players get called for 1.5% more fouls when there are black refs than white refs. Black players get called for 1% more fouls when there are white refs than black refs.- In an all black referee team white players get called for 7% more fouls- In an all white referee team, black players get called for 2% more fouls</div>There's so many flaws to this data it isn't even funny.1. Most of the time there are mixed referee teams..so what do they do with that data? So the players are playing under both..are those stats thrown out the window because it doesn't prove this point? Rarely are there all-race referee teams..so these stats are weighted because of how rarely it occurs2. Prove to me there's bias among coaches3. What the F*ck do 1% more fouls have to do with anything? ONE FRIGGIN PERCENT4. There are flukes to those 250,000 games because there may have been many injuries to the players of each race in those games so that is inaccurate as well5. GIVE ME A BREAK..All these stats are doing is trying to convince races to get angry at one another and find more reasons to hate each other..disgusting
I think they should weight all the data by minutes played, % of refs of a certain race, % of team's race, % of coaches on a team of a certain race, then they should put it in a flow chart or pie chart or something!
Hey pesty, basically summarize for all of us, Lets say a team like GSW filled with black players, and a team like I dont even know, uhm the whats the whitest team in the NBA? who would win? (theoritacally speaking statistically ofcourse)
This thing as to be the gayest things ever. They just have to much time to be saying this crap. Most of the time they are right anyways. Just because they are black or white or whatever doesn't mean anything if some who is black or white makes a foul they will call it. They don't care if it's a white, black, or whatever color. So to me it's a joke; I think it's retarded.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ May 2 2007, 07:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There's so many flaws to this data it isn't even funny.1. Most of the time there are mixed referee teams..so what do they do with that data? So the players are playing under both..are those stats thrown out the window because it doesn't prove this point? Rarely are there all-race referee teams..so these stats are weighted because of how rarely it occurs2. Prove to me there's bias among coaches3. What the F*ck do 1% more fouls have to do with anything? ONE FRIGGIN PERCENT4. There are flukes to those 250,000 games because there may have been many injuries to the players of each race in those games so that is inaccurate as well5. GIVE ME A BREAK..All these stats are doing is trying to convince races to get angry at one another and find more reasons to hate each other..disgusting</div>you continue to demonstrate your lack of statistical knowledge1. They have it broken down by the number of referees of each race on the crew, 1, 2, or 3. And it's a demonstrable trend2. There's bias AGAINST coaches, not among coaches. Your literacy is about a .1 out of 103. It is a demonstrable difference, and it adds up with every other stat to contribute to a 2% winning percentage difference, which is extremely significant4. The odds of there being a fluke in a body of data this big are in the trillion to one range. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I think they should weight all the data by minutes played, % of refs of a certain race, % of team's race, % of coaches on a team of a certain race, then they should put it in a flow chart or pie chart or something!</div>That's basically what the study is if you actually read the whole thing, except using slightly more complex methods than a pie chart.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Hey pesty, basically summarize for all of us, Lets say a team like GSW filled with black players, and a team like I dont even know, uhm the whats the whitest team in the NBA? who would win? (theoritacally speaking statistically ofcourse)</div>The team with more minutes played by white players would win 52% of the time, assuming the teams were exactly equal, the number probably going to 53% if you took the extreme of the whitest team in the NBA.btw, there is word from Dean Oliver in the Nuggets front office that they will consider this study to a slight extent in future trades.
To sum this up for everybody who is having a knee jerk reaction to the title in a bite sized way, this is more of a case study in the growing and vast body of evidence that nearly everybody is a little bit racist subconsciously. It is not saying that David Stern says to the referees "we have to make calls against those black players", it's saying that in split second decisions where things could go either way the refs' neural nets make the decision that it's an opposite race player when the call is ambiguous in a lot of cases. It's not saying the refs are consciously trying to discriminate, it's saying that refs of both races are subconsciously discriminating, and due to the demographics it hurts black players and predominantly black teams more.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ May 3 2007, 12:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That's basically what the study is if you actually read the whole thing, except using slightly more complex methods than a pie chart.</div>It was a joke... but a pie chart isn't exactly a method.
Couldn't have said this better than this guy in the Association of Pro Basketball Research forum regarding most people's responses:<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>But I'm seeing a lot of people here trying to dismiss this report, which is based on a large sample of data covering over a decade's worth of games, with anecdotal evidence. Can any of the report's critics really say that they're perceptive enough, and have good enough memories, to notice bias on the level the report is claiming? The report isn't claiming blatant and "frequent" (the way most people would define "frequent") examples of racism. It's not like it's saying that there are white refs making completely unjustifiable calls against black players, or that black players are in danger of fouling out with white refs in the game. It's saying that over the course of a number of games, refs might unconciously penalize players of a different race with a couple of extra fouls. Comments like "It's stupid" and "Somebody's got too much time on their hands," made without even bothering to examine the math, just shows that people are willing to dismiss somethings because it doesn't follow along with their own gut instincts. I think it may also be an anti-intellectual attitude: players and others involved in sports think that their own unquantified memories ("real experience") trumps the work of "math geeks" who supposedly have book smarts but lack in "common sense." It reminds me of the way a lot of APBRmetrics stats have been slowly and suspiciously received by people in the mainstream, and it's frustrating.</div>something disturbing from nuggets front office man Dean Oliver (by front office man I mean he works in the front office and has some say, but is not close to the end all be all):<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>So if the average black starter makes $7 million a year, a similarly-skilled white starter would be worth $10-$11 million - approximately 50 percent more. That is a HUGE effect.</div>
Where's your source on that last quote?If EVERY sports reporter is dismissing it and EVERY fan is dismissing it..and no player has ever complained about it..then what the F*ck?LIke I said this is just dumb statsYou can make a stat say whatever you want..Why do you support it? What makes you such an activist for "The NBA is racist" bullsh**
This is flat out hilarious. To think IVY League professors waste their time doing idiotic studies like this is a disgrace to higher education.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (playaofthegame @ May 3 2007, 11:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Where's your source on that last quote?If EVERY sports reporter is dismissing it and EVERY fan is dismissing it..and no player has ever complained about it..then what the F*ck?LIke I said this is just dumb statsYou can make a stat say whatever you want..Why do you support it? What makes you such an activist for "The NBA is racist" bullsh**</div>the source for my last quote was an Association of pro hoops research forum.I support it because it is statistically valid. If you weren't such a knee jerk reactor you'd see that it's not litigating the NBA is racist, it's litigating that referees, like all people, are subconsciously racist and that subconscious difference is substantial. You keep saying the exact same thing, instead of reading any of my posts which would assuage any sane man's problems with it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ChuckTheD @ May 3 2007, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>So how does Yao fit into this study?</div> Good one. You can call him neutral.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ May 3 2007, 12:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Couldn't have said this better than this guy in the Association of Pro Basketball Research forum regarding most people's responses:</div>One thing that he fails to think about is that it could be the inverse... that black people are failing to call fouls on black people and similarly white refs on white people. But y'know, whatever.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ChuckTheD @ May 3 2007, 06:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>So how does Yao fit into this study?</div>My joke was better! :beee:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>One thing that he fails to think about is that it could be the inverse... that black people are failing to call fouls on black people and similarly white refs on white people. But y'know, whatever.</div>isn't it the same difference? If you call less on one group you're calling more on the other.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ May 4 2007, 01:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>isn't it the same difference? If you call less on one group you're calling more on the other.</div>If you're comparing one race to another, yeah, it's the same thing. When you're talking about statistical bias though, no.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ May 4 2007, 12:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If you're comparing one race to another, yeah, it's the same thing. When you're talking about statistical bias though, no.</div>If I understand what you're saying, it's that it's a possibility the refs call less calls on their own race rather than more against the other race. What you don't get is that it still ends out with the same results; the referees calling more fouls against the other race than their own race.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ May 4 2007, 02:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If I understand what you're saying, it's that it's a possibility the refs call less calls on their own race rather than more against the other race. What you don't get is that it still ends out with the same results; the referees calling more fouls against the other race than their own race.</div>The only problem with that is that it isn't really racist. I mean, you can't call me racist for being nice to white people and fair to black people. The term racist implies that you are making another race inferior to your own through your actions and language.
