Rumor: Warriors and Bulls Want Yi

by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 4, 2007 5:30 PM PDT in Rumors

Earlier today Chad Ford dropped version 3.0 of his mock draft on ESPN.com (stay tuned for the 2nd Edition of We're Mocking You). In his mock draft Yi Jianlian of The Movement fame is slotted to go to the nuclear disaster that is the Boston Celtics with the #5 pick. BUT Ford sees the Golden State Warriors and Chicago Bulls making it interesting:

This is a tough call since the future of the Celtics is so murky. Yi has the most upside at this point but also carries a significant risk that Celts boss Danny Ainge might not want to bear. And with Paul Pierce stumping for immediate help, it might be an unpopular pick.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Celtics traded the pick -- the Warriors and Bulls would like to move up here and grab Yi.

To Chi-town or Oaktown?

The Bulls are big on Yi:

The Bulls really want Yi, however, so don't be surprised if they try to move up a few spots in the draft to get him.

But so are the Dubs who Ford has taking 7 foot center Jason Smith from Colorado State:

Watch the Warriors closely. They are very high on Yi Jianlian and will try to move up in the draft.

If they can't, Smith is the perfect type of player for Nellie. He is tall and athletic, gets up and down the floor and can score from just about anywhere on the floor. He also plays with great energy. He could be a real sleeper in the draft.

If Ford's on the money it looks like the only thing that could stop the Warriors from bringing Yi's intriguing potential to the Bay is the Bulls. Depending on how serious the Bulls really are about getting Yi, they're in the driver's seat here. The Bulls have a high pick at #9 (thanks to Isiah Thomas) that could bring back a very nice player in a much hyped draft class, while the Warriors have a late mid-round pick at #18 that's usually good for nothing more than a crapshoot. Right now I'd say the Bulls will probably wind up with Yi, but you never know what can happen if We Believe Yi.

Which is the more likely destination for Yi, Chicago or the Bay Area?

Check out:

99% of rumors never happen, but 99% of them are fun to talk about!

0 recs | Comment 44 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I say it's not worth it.

We don't want another project, do we? I think that if we picked Yi, Nellie could shove him down the rother and he could end up like POB. However, Tiago Splitter is the immediate help we needed on rebounding. Everyone says we want to be good NOW, no? Not 3 years down the road?

SPLITTER FOR THE WIN!!!!

by Zorgon on Jun 4, 2007 5:57 PM PDT 0 recs

Classic BSPN

I don't want to rain on your parade, but when you consider that the Blazers have put Zach Randolph on the table with several pieces to get the number 5 pick, I'm pretty sure it's going to be hard for Boston to trade the pick to Chicago or GS. To get a pick that high, you have to give something up and frankly, the Warriors don't want to give anything up. We can start senseless speculation that the Celtics would take JR, but they'd much rather have Big Zach. The Bulls are in the same situation, not wanting to give up the great piece that the Celtics want.

Everything I hear is that Boston is going to hang onto the pick unless they can get a low-post threat.

by pree on Jun 4, 2007 7:17 PM PDT 0 recs

But Pree my friend

You're making too much sense and forgetting how foolish Danny Ainge and the rest of the Celts' front office is.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 4, 2007 7:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

Yea, Ainge is dumb

Heads are going to roll in Boston if Ainge can't make things happen this offseason. Supposedly, the Knicks will give up Lee and Robinson for Telfair and the pick. If that doesn't pan out, the Zach deal isn't going to go away.

As far as I'm concerned, if Ainge takes anything the Bulls or Dubs offer over those two deals above, he'll get fired. Simple as that.

by pree on Jun 4, 2007 8:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

I still say

If we love Yi that much we have to give up Baron. Baron for Rondo, Ratliff and the #5 pick.

Celtics unite P2 and his buddy Boom. Together with Jefferson, they give that sad franchise instant credibility. They'd be a shrewd move or two away from a serious EC championship contender.
Yi could be a stud, but he almost certainly won't be one right away. He'll take a couple of years to develop, which would be likely be a waste of the two years remaining on Baron's contract. Yi, Biedrins, JRich, Monta, and Rondo (+ Kelenna, Thad Young, whoever) becomes our fast, versatile Nellieball core going forward.
Rondo is blazing fast, superphysical, and an absolute monster on defense -- just the type of PG Nellie would love. (He can't shoot a lick, but ah well -- Yi, JRich and Monta can).
Ratliff's huge expiring contract gives us the money we'll need to sign AB, Monta, or hopefully both.

Most people on this site would scream bloody murder, but if we could swing it, this would likely be a great move for the future of the franchise.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 4, 2007 8:09 PM PDT up 0 recs

Oh what?!

That deal is amazing for the Celtics!

Rondo isn't even the starter for the Celtics (he started games because West was hurt and Telfair is Tank Johnson's buddy).

Taking on Ratliff's expiring deal isn't a big deal because the Warriors won't need cap space to keep Biedrins or Ellis. Sure, it'll help keep away from the luxury tax, but it isn't a necessity if they can take care of Adonal and Jasikevicius somehow.

Trading Baron this offseason after what he did in the playoffs would literally take away any ounce of respect the Warriors got after beating the Mavericks. After 12 years of toiling for respect, why give it all away for Yi?

by pree on Jun 4, 2007 8:44 PM PDT up 0 recs

Sell high, my friend, sell high

When Baron went down to injury mid-season, half the people on this site would have said JRich was more valuable than Baron. I was as enthralled as anyone by BD's late-season/postseason heroics, but we have to keep in mind it was just 30 or so games. The old concerns are still there: the big $$$, the poor FT shooting, the tendency to hoist too much, and, most importantly, the dangerously fragile wheels.

That said, I agree -- we'd be taking a big step back, and basically reversing the gains we made by beating Dallas. I'm still way more of a fan of going balls out "GFIN" -- keeping Baron, holding our breath on the injury-thing, and making a serious run at KG, Kobe, or at the very least Artest.

To me trading valuable pieces (presumably Monta or Biedrins) to move up and grab Yi is a weird "middle-ground" move. It won't win us a championship, and it doesn't help us long term.

On Rondo: you need to check out the Game Log from his last 15 games or so. His April numbers (in 36.9 MPG): 13.0 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.5 APG, 2.5 SPG. He's already by consensus one of the toughest defensive PGs in the league. Unless he really regresses, he's easily moved past Delonte West on their depth chart. And I think his game would truly blossom in Nellieball. Didn't you see all those great YouTube clips of his sweet dishes to Kelenna back in their Kentucky days?

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 4, 2007 9:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

No doubt ..

Rondo is a defensive stud. I'm not disputing that. When your arms are reminiscent of a brontosaurus' neck, you'll be a good defender. But be very careful when you look at those numbers in April as the season came to an end: the Celtics finished 4-12 when Rondo was producing like that. In my eyes, that's the classic "great numbers on a bad team" scenario. You were looking at a team that had nothing on it, so he had the ball in his hands, which is why he probably averaged about 2 TOs a game. His numbers also were skewed because if I recall correctly, he finished the last three games of the season on fire against a Detroit team that rested Chauncey and Rip and he put up some numbers on D-Wade a few games after he came back. The other game was against Jameer Nelson, who is well-known as one of the worst defending PGs in the league, bunched with guys like Ridnour.

I know he had a good month with the numbers, but I think the circumstance is worth noting too.

As far as trading Baron goes, I think the team might benefit as far as saving some money and getting rid of the concerns that you have about his health and the holes in his game. But this team will literally become a laughing stock again if they made a move like that. Warrior fans should complain that they barely had any nationally televised games last season (and I'm sure you have) but do you think you'll get any positive publicity after a move like that?

It shouldn't always be about the pub - bottom line, trading Baron brings this team back too far and won't help win games.

That is a bad combination.

by pree on Jun 5, 2007 2:05 AM PDT up 0 recs

Yes, yes

I agree 100%. But remember, this is a diary about Yi. My trading Baron scenario was totally contingent on the proposition that we love Yi so much we're willing to do whatever it takes to move up and grab him.

Personally, I wouldn't do it. I'm pretty worried that Yi could be the latest Chad Ford confection. At the very least he'll take patience and a long-view to develop. When your franchise player is a 28 year-old hoops demon at the absolute peak of his creative powers -- but with ticking time bombs for knees and two years left on his contract -- patience and long-views are things you don't really want to be messing around with.

In other words, forget trading up, forget the long-view, keep Baron and go get him a Kobe, a KG, or a RonRon to play with.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 5, 2007 4:10 AM PDT up 0 recs

Tis true

The dubs franchise would look pretty solid.

But yeah, it's a tough pill for people to swallow trading The Boss away for a project. The Warriors offensive looks utterly utterly lost when Baron isn't on the court. Stephen Jackson bringing it down and trying to run point gives me nightmares.

But if Baron gets injured again he won't be worth as much value as he is now. And with a draft as big as this coming up, the Warriors really need to think this through.

by jlagace on Jun 4, 2007 9:42 PM PDT up 0 recs

Well

if Ainge is thinking about making that trade for Zach Randolph after they got swindled into picking up Portland's other piece of trash in Sebastian Telfair, they should fire him immediately before he gets the chance.

Randolph would only impede the growth of Jefferson. Besides that team needs good veteran leadership & defenders. Neither role seems to be Randolph's forte.

by the evil monkey on Jun 5, 2007 6:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

Hate to say it

but the bulls have a much better shot to get Yi because of their higher pick. The only way I see the Celtics trading that pick with the Warriors is:

Celtics get:
POB, 1st Round Pick, Jason Richardson, Pietrus

GSW gets:
#5 Pick, Paul Pierce

Not a bad trade though.

by ballin on Jun 4, 2007 7:20 PM PDT 0 recs

C'mon dude.

Not a bad trade for who? Paul Pierce is worth more than JRich, Pietrus, and POB on his own. If you take the #5 pick out of our proposal, it actually makes some sense for both teams.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 4, 2007 7:48 PM PDT up 0 recs

I wish that trade happened

If only Danny Ainge got drunk and made that phone call to Mullin would that happen. Yi is overrated. I'd rather have Brandon Wright if we got the #5 pick than Yi. I don't think Yi will be aggressive enough to survive in the NBA, and will rely more on his jumpshot. He's compared to Dirk, but Dirk has such a sweet stroke, and way better ball handling skills.

by Mdawg851 on Jun 4, 2007 8:21 PM PDT up 0 recs

Hotlanta is taking Wright at #3

They made him one of them promises. They'll take him at #3 and they're hoping they can take Crittenton at #11.

by pree on Jun 4, 2007 8:27 PM PDT up 0 recs

dirk

has a way better stroke, but ball handling skills? Did you watch any game we played against the mavs? That is his weak point.

by Psion on Jun 5, 2007 2:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

es imposible!

Mickael is technically not under contract and cannot be moved for a pick. In fact, he can't be moved until after mid-July when free agents can move around. The draft will be two to three weeks old by then.

by pree on Jun 4, 2007 8:24 PM PDT up 0 recs

reunite baron and paul

great friendship, and street skills

by stevenro59 on Jun 5, 2007 12:32 AM PDT up 0 recs

reunite baron and paul

great friendship, and street skills

by stevenro59 on Jun 5, 2007 12:32 AM PDT up 0 recs

I'd say go for broke...

Make next year's 1st round draft unprotected part of the offer.
Anything but Baron and Beans to have Yi-st meet West...

by ThermoElectro on Jun 4, 2007 8:51 PM PDT 0 recs

Why so high on Yi?

This site is so high on Yi. Must e the Asian connection. Not being racist, I'm an Asian brotha myself. But.....

I don't think he's the answer. Just a project. With the Dubs situation as it is, the answer should be to win or make an effort to go deep into the playoffs NOW. We need to trade for a quality veteran, not a Chinese project.

I think Yi could be good but not by next year. We should find a way to trade for a legitimate PF.

Where the !@#$ are you now, Billy Owens????

by Manute4Three on Jun 4, 2007 9:32 PM PDT 0 recs

Why so high on Yi?

They think he's frickin Yao Ming simply cause he's chinese. but he's actually more a tony kuckoc. Look at his shoulder width and tell me how he's gonna add enough pounds to stand up to the NBA big men? If he can't bull it inside then his height is a dis-advantage, just makes him more un-cordinated outside, check out his floppy out of control legs on those dunk videos. At best he'd be a bizzaro Dris afraid to go near the basket and we already have a real Dris that WILL go near the basket and lots of other experienced guys that like the outside shots. We don't need to jump on every story that comes along looking for a home. We need certain skills to complement the guys we already have. As someone posted recently in the "monta" thread we should be looking at guys like sean williams who won't cost so much and who might be a lot more usefull. If we're gonna spend big bucks let's get a proven guy like Marion or Gasol.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 4, 2007 11:54 PM PDT up 0 recs

High on Yi

Honestly at least for me I have to say the entertainment value is pretty high. If you missed all the jokes I've snuck in my posts of Yi, then go back and take a look. (Yi dunking from the 3pt line? Haha, tell me you guys understood that was a joke.)

Almost a year ago I wrote a piece calling for the Warriors to draft this fairly unknown Chinese prospect just to make things fun for a pretty awful franchise (remember that drought thing?) and a loyal, but extremely frustrated fanbase. There was no indication that the Warriors were even interested in the guy back then, but now they're rumored to be enamored with him to the extent that they're trying to move up in the draft.

I don't think anyone sees Yi as the next Yao Ming. He's not a slow, plodding, strong, low post player like Yao. Instead Yi looks to be a gifted 7 footer with a sweet jumper, nice handles, and some explosiveness. He's more like KG than Yao. I'm of course not saying he'll ever approach KG's level as that's pretty unfair, but hey the guy looks like an intriguing prospect and a great fit for Nellieball. Don't forget that Nellie's boy Del Harris was a big Yi fan as well when he coached the Chinese national squad.

I'd be surprised if anyone thought Yi would solve all the Warrior problems, but with the #18 pick and a roster heavy with 2's and 3's holding out for this illustrious 20-10 and 2 block big man is a false hope. You go for the best guy available and with Yi's crew approving the Warriors and his style of play it makes a lot of sense to give it a try.

Also, another billion additions to the mighty GSoM community would be hype!

by Atma Brother ONE on Jun 5, 2007 12:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

If we're going to take a risk

Then why trade up talent we have and draft a potential risk guy when we can just draft Sean Williams at #18. All mock drafts point to Williams being available at #18, and the guy is amazing on weak side help defense, just watch his highlights on yahoo. This guy really has potential to be like a Ben Wallace type player if pushed the right way. Yi is athletic, but as much as he would fit in our system, we'd have to give up too much to get the #4 or #5 pick, only to wait 3 years for him to develop.

The Warriors have to decide whether they want to push now or build for the future, meaning trade away Baron and build around Monta and Biedrins. Or they can trade away Monta and Biedrins and build around Baron and JRich.

by Mdawg851 on Jun 5, 2007 1:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

damn

you mean yi can't dunk from the 3pt line, solve all our problems, and be the next KG?????? My hopes and dreams are shattered.... just shattered

by FoyledAgain on Jun 6, 2007 1:30 AM PDT up 0 recs

TOTALLY RACIST!

Just kidding!

For me, Yi probably isn't "the answer" to the W's problems but purely from a fun/marketing perspective, having Yi in the bay just seems like a great fit (with or without his game, preferrably with...). Here at GSoM, we're partially being facetious when we talk about Yi. As Atma said previously, we really DON'T think he can dunk from the 3pt line (some folks at another Warrior site thought we were idiots for thinking that, THEN went on to explain how given the trajectory of his jump there's no way he'd be that position if he actually did jump from the 3pt line....).

From a social stand point, Yi would be breakin' all the Asian stereotypes! Unlike the other players, he's not too weird looking, has a fashionable/up to date haircut, AND is dating the equivalent to one of those women who opens suitcases on "deal or no deal"! The guy is the mack! Plus, imagine him on KTSF doing spots in mandarin and cantonese (i'm sure they'll probably dub it in Vietnamese and Tagalog, too during those hours). The Warriors could use a transnational superstar since we haven't had a superstar since Sprewell (Baron is, but i think he's kinda b-rate cuz of those tricky knees...). But again, just being partially facetious.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jun 5, 2007 10:38 AM PDT up 0 recs

TOTALLY RACIST!

Why don't you just sign him him up for that asian racist league we were discussing a couple of weeks ago? and leave the warriors out of the equation? Drafting to suit the tastes of a fan group is wack. Draft for need!

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 5, 2007 1:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

Drafting for need is wack

At #5, you draft the guy you think has the best chance of being an NBA star, period.

Just of curiosity, Skeptic, since you keep beating the "big body or bust" drum: if this were an alternate universe in which we had the #2 pick, would you want us to draft the wispy 210-pound small forward from Texas, or a "true" big man like Spencer Hawes or Roy Hibbert? Or maybe Sean Williams?

I still think it's unlikely we move up and draft Yi (mostly b/c we don't really have the chips to do so) but if we do it'll be 100% because Nelson and Mullin think he has a great shot at being a star in this league. His race and how well it jibes with Bay Area demographics will have absolutely nothing to do with it. So don't fret.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 5, 2007 2:02 PM PDT up 0 recs

word...

skepticon, if you noticed in my post, i said we were also partially being facetious. if you are that terrified and threatened by ethnocentrism (or what you think we are doing as being ethnocentric) than that actually begins to scare me.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jun 5, 2007 2:13 PM PDT up 0 recs

let us not forget Nelson's love for

the long, tall mormon Shawn Bradley - for better and worse, I can see Nelson taking the gamble now too

by hardcore on Jun 5, 2007 3:16 PM PDT up 0 recs

At #5, you draft ?

Hi Sleepy, If we had the #2 spot I'd be happy with either Oden or Durant.
If we could trade monta for the #5 pick I'd draft mike Conley. I wouldn't take Yi since we already have enough outside shooters that I like better. and yeah, I'd probably take a chance on sean williams at 18.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 6, 2007 8:35 AM PDT up 0 recs

confused...

why does an "asian" league become "racist" because of its historical politics? my larger question is why would you feel compelled or what is your desire to play in a race or ethnic specific league in the first place? When there are rec leagues all over the place, why does this asian league all of sudden become a problem for you?

merely dubbing their exclusivity as "racist" is an ahistorical account of racism or about the usage of these basketball leagues and fostering community amongst asian folks. basketball leagues in some Japanese communities was as much about community AND support admist huge amounts of racism aimed towards asians in the early twentieth century (hello, internment). its not necssarily the same dynamic now, but fostering community and relationships at times serves purposes that are particular to communities, which i think you need to consider throughouly before just claiming it as 'racist'. if you do some research, these sports leagues were actually responses to all the racist attacks by white people historically.

also, the jackie robinson example is actually out of context because that was about being able to play on a national stage for obviously, major bucks than other leagues. it doesn't make sensee to equate a fledling non-profit league to something of the MLB. People (not all) who choose to play for Asian leagues do it for much different reasons than access or paychecks and fame of professional sports.

It doesn't make sense to call it 'racism' when there isn't anything at stake. was this even an issue on your radar ? or did you just want to be a part of the league just cause they won't let you? your sudden interest in this league just because of its potentially exclusive policies is actually more troubling to me than anything. What would provoke you to all of sudden want to play for an all asian league? thats like saying I, as a chinese american, want to play in an all jewish league. why would i even care to?

by dj fuzzylogic on Jun 5, 2007 2:11 PM PDT up 0 recs

and then

Will Ferrell says "I blanked out.. What happened??" (Old School)

by jlagace on Jun 5, 2007 11:05 PM PDT up 0 recs

confused ??

Hi DJfl, I'm confused that I'd have to defend being anti rascist. That's like having to explain why one is anti gaybashing or anti childmolesting? I dint know it was even still legal to bar folks at the door based on their race? If these guys wanna play with short people they can set height limits but not race limits. Keeping it going because of history is a cop out. Are you supporting the confederate flag hanging in south carolina? or how about the jews in israel? they get wacked by the nazis so they go over and start wackin palestinians to make it right? History doesn't make it good, we need to learn from history and stop repeating the mistakes. I never said I want to play in that league in fact I said I wouldn't play with such rascist people. but I don't want some poor kid sitting home alone because his friends are all out playing ball in a league he can't join cause he's the wrong color.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 6, 2007 8:57 AM PDT up 0 recs

Gotta support Skeptic here

Say what you want about the "necessity" of all-(whatever race) basketball leagues -- they're racist by definition.

Personally, if I wanted to join the closest rec league to my house but couldn't because of the color of my skin, I would be a little bummed out. I wouldn't make a scene, 'cos that's not my thing, but I would thing the people doing the discriminating were rather lame, even if within their "rights."

And what's "Asian" anyway? In Britain, East Indians are considered Asian. Would Atma and Hash be allowed? How 'bout people between Indian and Chinese -- like Nepalese or Mongolians or Tibetans? What about my wife, who's Japanese but never even considered the concept that she was "Asian" until she moved to the States in her 20s? Or how 'bout if we had kids? Or grandkids? 50 % Asian OK, but 25% no go?

Yeah, the thought of a bunch of dudes sitting around making judgment calls on these issues is pretty disturbing. It might not be "discriminatory" in a true legal sense, but it's damn creepy.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 6, 2007 10:48 AM PDT up 0 recs

in agreement about

blood quantum arguments. those are tricky and problematic. but i think comparing those particular examples that Skepticon used are completely different than say a not-for-profit asian rec league that have a historical legacy of serving smaller and broader asian american communities who were deliberately barred from inclusion into any place within the mainstream public sphere. asian american people had to make these spaces themselves for safety and support as well.

the examples that skepticon cites are extreme forms of exclusion coupled with genocide and other major limitations to peoples life chances. the jackie robinson example is NOT the same, in my opinion, because the MLB is a business and possibly access for a world of new financial security and possibilities. If we forget, African Americans were institutionally SEGREGATED and denied access to a whole realm of other public spaces and public services through racist cultural, economic, and political mechanisms. Racism isn't just name calling and not getting picked for a team or not being allowed to play but tied to LARGER landscape of real material exclusions. It's not just as if the MLB and its racists fans were like "sorry you can't play," it was it amidst some of the intensist racist sentiment and public and symbolic denigration in addition to given less than equal chances--like those global examples skepticon describes. comparing a league with specific rules about community building is not the same as deliberate hate speech/hate crimes/and exclusions of Jackie Robinson's era, it just is NOT the same.

To merely expose any place as "racist" because they don't let certain groups in i think is shortsighted. granted, i don't want to overstate that ALL leagues with certain exclusions are okay or that it is justified. but given my experiences playing and being a part of SOME (i can't speak for all of them) of these leagues, it offers feelings of friendship, community and mutuality that are often denied else where. If someone said x,y,z people aren't invited aren't allowed because we hate you, of course that's going to be outta control and stupid. but i think we need to offer a more nuanced analysis of the differences in "racism" and what's really at stake.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jun 6, 2007 1:47 PM PDT up 0 recs

also to add

if we forget, Jackie Robinson was met with INTENSE hate speech/violence upon his entrace because people thought African Americans were subhuman (and in some places those ideas still exist...) and didn't deserve to be in the same vicinty as whites. It wasn't as if it was just about some general integration of people, but that Jackie Robinson had to prove to a racist country that he was "human" and just as credible as anyone else. i doubt an all-asian league operates on the same premise that they think you are not human or are some 'savage' or 3/5ths person or that this league is a part of a larger project for this non-profit basketball league to kill off your peoples like the extreme but real cases that you mentioned.

granted, wanting to play in the closest rec league is a real concern, but Asian rec leagues are not ubiquitous. they are not located in some central Asian location as if all asians lived in the same place. In h.s., I had to consistently drive 30mins from fremont to cupertino or concord to play and people all over the bay had travel too to play in these tourneys and leagues. Whats even more ridiculous is the assumptions about these racist leagues are as if they are the ONLY league that exist at all, when in reality they serve a small population of people one day a week or often one tourney a month. these leagues operate, sometimes, through informal networks and are not highly publicized like rec leagues through city services, which are often in quite abundance in ANY city in the bay! this is also why i find the attacks of 'racism' somewhat unqualified.

to get to the point that skepticon brought up about his friends playing in a league and exlcluding him, here is what i have say about that:

one, are all your friends Asian? or are you hypothetically speaking. and if they all were, doesn't this work against your own logic of integration when all your friends are of one ethnic group?
two, why would it be the leagues fault that your friends chose NOT to play with you? wouldn't you have a talk with your friends about some compromise about other spaces to also play at or why they're dissing you like that? They don't seem like good friends if they're jsut gonna abandon you like that. wouldn't you ask them why they chose to play with a bunch of asians than assuming its just some racial bias that seeks to exclude you?

While i find both your concerns some what valid in some respects, i really urge you to examine how these things function before blasting them as the new equivalents to the nazis or the KKK, because that is far from what their purpose is. Again, i'm not saying ALL asian leagues operate this way,in fact some might acutally be f'ed up. but im would like to open up this dialogue beyond binaries of "racist" or "not racist" because its not that simple to me.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jun 6, 2007 4:24 PM PDT up 0 recs

how about the draft?

and also, i was thinking, how is what i said any different than marketing schemes that david stern is conjuring up when he thinks about lottery prospects and where they should go? all the hoopla about durant, oden et al is not about 'need' in sterns mind but about dollars and cents. i know its like comparing apples and oranges, but they're both fruit anyway.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jun 6, 2007 12:52 AM PDT up 0 recs

Asian Leagues aren't Racist

Racism. n.

1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Based on a dictionary definition. So technically, no they're not racist. The key difference here is that Asian leagues weren't built upon the belief that inherent differences between Asians and the rest of the general populace deem Asians superior. The purpose of the league is to promote a stronger sense of community amongst Asian Americans. That's the key difference b/t them and the KKK.

Now obviously you can disagree with the policies but you can't call these people racist. Otherwise, fraternities and sororities would be sexist by your definition.

by ThermoElectro on Jun 7, 2007 4:39 PM PDT up 0 recs

They are racist

Depending on what definition you use.

Read your definition #2 carefully: "usually involving the ideas that one's own race is superior." Not always. Definition #2 of "racist" under Princeton wordnet is simply "discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion." That's the definition I was using, and it certainly applies to Asian rec leagues.

As I said, I don't consider them illegal, or evil, but I do consider them rather lame and, yes, racist.

The KKK analogy is a shameless straw-man of the lowest order. Frankly, I was shocked that DJFL, whose opinion I usually respect, would even trot it out, and when he did I didn't even consider it worthy of comment. Nobody in this diary remotely compared Asian Rec leagues to the KKK; but as long as you're doing so, I should probably point out the line "we don't think we're superior, we just want to be separate from them" is indeed straight out of the KKK playbook.

Whatever. As I said, I don't think it's that a big of a deal. Asian rec leagues are basically the same as sororities and frats, or maybe mildly worse because:

They're more likely to exclude someone who would otherwise have to go to a less convenient location.
As far as I know, there's no clear definition of "Asian," and if there is, I'm sure it would make me cringe. Is it really just about the eyelids?

I think frats and sororities are unenlightened. I think Asian rec leagues are unenlightened. I don't think they should be banned; I just group them with other unenlightened shit that people do: driving SUVs, eating fast-food regularly, listening to Rush Limbaugh, whatever. Hey, I break down and go McDonald's sometimes too. Nobody's perfect.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 7, 2007 9:37 PM PDT up 0 recs

Edit

OK, looking back, I see that Skeptic did actually mention the Confederate flag and the Nazis. My bad -- that's what I get for defending him, I guess. Still, I totally agree with his basic distaste for racial discrimination, even when practiced by groups that have traditionally been ostracized or oppressed.

by Sleepy Freud on Jun 7, 2007 9:52 PM PDT up 0 recs

My bad -- that's what I get for defending him,

Flopping around like a confederate flag caught in a hitler speech eh sleepy! you should enter politics!!
I look at racist as like pregnant, a little bit can turn into a lot in a very short time. These guys might have had a good reason to bar the devils in the past but not now. The US apologized to japan for the bomb, the japanese apologized to the koreans for the comfort women Are there white only or black only rec leagues in the yah area? Why can't the bay area asians say enough already? We're never gonna move forward if we keep looking backward. Release the brakes and let's dip!

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jun 7, 2007 11:08 PM PDT up 0 recs