Hansborough was the first white player indiana has selected in the draft under BIRD and first since 2000 when they took Primož Brezec in the draft. If pacers GM was magic johnson and not larry bird no one qould question it. Larry Bird had to take dunleavey and murphy because he HAD to trade jack and harrington.

Is Larry Bird a racist? No. Is the Pacer organization racist? No. But, given the market demographics of Indianapolis (67% of the city population is considered white), is it a stretch to say that drafting a guy like Hansborough and making the Murphleavy trade after brawls and strip club gunfire were due, at least in part, for marketing purposes? I dont think so. Especially when you consider the fact that, just a few months ago, it was reported that the Pacer organization is struggling and that it may not be able to afford the lease at Conseco Fieldhouse. I’m sure the drafting of and trading for these talented, hardworking, no nonsense (and yes white, cornfed looking) guys has something to do wtih appealing to the masses and trying to win back that basketball crazy town. Im not saying that any one person or group of people are racist, but I dont think its purely coincidence that these guys have ended up in Indiana.

I think a lot of decisions factored in to why the Pacers have 6 white players (which deviates from the norm on an NBA roster). Part of the explanation could be the way the players fit into the system. Part of the explanation could also be character makeup. The Pacers organization has been embarrassed the last couple of years, so you can see why they’d might not want a guy who’s red flagged. RACE could have played apart in this decision, but you can’t go out and call Bird a Racist. That’s ignorant and not really correct.

Now would anyone be asking this question if the Pacers turned out to be a playoff team? There’s no race quota in this league, team’s can carry all White rosters all Black rosters, shoot even all Green and Yellow rosters, as long as they have talent. Racism and Prejudice still exist in our society, and it’s within all of us to certain extents, no matter how much we claim we’re tolerant. Personal and racial bias’ could’ve been a factor in trading for and drafting White players in Indiana. But I’m hoping that it has more to do with talent and team fit than the color of one’s skin.

I don’t think it’s being racist; it’s the type of players he sees bringing the kind of basketball he wants to see the team play.

The Celtics used to have a mix of white players on their team and the team chemistry was very good, but by and large the better players today are not white, this is one of the reason I like the NBA so much. Because to me it transcends color, you hardly ever think of the race issue, it is never a consideration when wanting to get the best player for the team, the only consideration is what puts the best team on the floor.

We all want Amare, and we want to trade our only white players, and that thought never occurred to me until right now, it was not even a consideration.

If Bird is making decisions based on race then he would be inept,

 I think he looks for a certain type of player hankering back to the old Celtics days: but it would be hard to believe he’s raciest: and if he is a raciest, lets give him what he wants and get Granger =)

Colorism is a separate issue from racism allthingsindy, it involves, at least in America, the dominance of lighter skinned people of any race over darker skinned people.

However, to bring an issue of race up is definitely not racist, that is dangerous thinking. In pretty much any situation, you can see some racial aspects. The question is, is it an important factor? Like, seeing Murphy get a double double in a league that is predominantly black has elements of race, but I do not think anyone would consider that racism (although maybe how he got to the NBA could have involved racism, I am not suggesting this is the case for Murphy particularly, just saying it potentially exists).

But, here’s the thing. Ever since that fight at Auburn Hills the team has had an image problem. I don’t necessarily know if the image problem is warranted, but it exists. They got rid of perceived malcontents like Tinsley, Jackson, and Artest, and replaced them with guys they considered more clean and acceptable to the Indianan (Indian? Indianese I have no idea) masses. If you leave it at that, it is not racist. But what goes through Bird’s mind when he is making decisions about who is clean? Clearly it is not only race, otherwise Granger would be playing for another team. But I find it hard to believe that Bird does not think at least a little that white players will remind the fanbase less of the “savages” at Auburn Hills. In addition, the perception of Hansbrough seems to be a good old all-American boy. He plays hard, and he stayed for four years. But maybe another factor in him being seen as a clean cut All-American is that he is white. I mean, Terrence Williams stayed for four years, and I didn’t hear a lot of praise for his decision (although I could be wrong, that is just from what I heard). Joakim Noah wasn’t exactly hailed as a good old All-American boy. Well, you say, that could be because he got caught smoking weed. But I have news for everybody, almost everyone, white or black or whatever, smokes weed at college. My friend rolled a blunt with Jonny Flynn. I go to UCLA, and I’ve seen the players, including the white Dragovic, at parties effing around. I find it hard to believe that Hansbrough did not do something in his four years there.

So people can debate the merits of how racist it is, or how racist it isn’t, but I’d find it hard to believe race is not a factor. Though people assume we’re in a post-racial society (and there’s been studies done, since Obama got elected perceived discrimination has went down), race is as salient an issue as ever. Sweeping it under the rug is not the answer. There needs to be an honest dialogue about it, not a lack of awareness. Because ignoring a problem does not make the problem go away, it just makes the problem more dangerous.