Euros and Yao

About 20 years ago an announcer got fired for suggesting black basketball players were superior because of slave breeding. At the time, although the comment was considered racist and offensive, most people secretly agreed with the base assessment: black basketball players were superior than other races.

Today, a quick glance at any NBA team, and the same observation holds - there are a lot more black basketball players. Traditionally, the explanation given was physical. Black players tended - for whatever reason - to be faster, stronger, taller and hence, superior to white players.

But a strange thing has happened between now and then. Basketball has gone global. And we see a TON of good Foreign players playing at the highest level. Dirk. Gasol. Ginobli. Yao. Nash. Barbosa. Biedrins. Turkoglu. Scola. Granted, some of these guys aren't at the top level, and for everyone one of these guys, there are ten black american ballplayers to be used as counter examples. But the evidence is enough to warrant rethinking black superiority and that perhaps the physical superiority argument does not adequately explain the phenomenon.

I contend that black superiority in basketball is as much a cultural as a physical phenomenon. To be "the best" at anything requires a delicate mix of talent and perseverance and opportunity. The perseverance element is key - the odds of becoming a pro basketball are so incredibly slim, something else must motivate a young talented basketball player to keep practicing his fall away or to keep playing when he's got a shitty coach or to work hard to recover from a difficult injury or to play pick up every afternoon after school. And I think the only explanation is love - a love for the game or love of competition or sport in general or the camaraderie of teammates or the delivery of the perfect pass or stealing the ball from the opponent or practicing that perfect crossover. Clearly, in the black community - particularly among the young men - there is a love and expertise in basketball that exceeds that in white america. It's the same reason why soccer excels in Brazil and hockey in Canada. It's a cultural understanding and love for the game that nurtures greatness.

There is great example right in front of us:

Chris Paul and Dwight Howard represent the future of the NBA. Outside the freak-case that is LeBron James, they are the two top young players in the NBA. And they provide the almost perfect nature vs. nurture contrast. Howard is a physical freak - 7 ft, strong as an ox. Take one look at the guy and you know he's a beast on the basketball court from a sheer physical standpoint. Coordinated, quick, limber, and about 1.5 times as large as the largest dudes on the planet. There is no secret to his excellence - a pure, physical, raw talent developed into a great basketball player. This is not to say his personality, work ethic, etc, doesn't contribute or isn't of the highest caliber - it does - but this guy is a freak of nature first and a basketball player second.

Chris Paul on the other hand is not physically remarkable. He's 6' tall and really quick. But he isn't quicker than 1000 other basketball players out there. If I had to guess, I'd say there are probably 50,000 people out there in the world with Chris Paul's physical abilities whereas with Dwight Howard, there are probably 10. It isn't Paul's physical abilities that make him great - it's his understanding of the game and smarts on the court. The guy sees the game differently from others. It is his mental quickness that is a cut above and his ability to understand pace and his teammates and opponents and to craft his game into something useful. His superiority is as rare as Howard's, but it is developed just like any other genius is developed, through the right set of circumstances, training, etc.

I'm bored of this post and don't even know where I'm going with it.