Utah I think is up there with cities that have trouble getting players to go to.

I've been to Salt Lake City- nice place, funky the way they handle their liquor- I might live there if it was the last place on earth...

I think KG is more about competing than anything racial related.

I haven't been to Boston- but I've been up to Portland ME & Portsmouth NH and did take real note of how 'white' it was when going out.

Stupid article. If they ever had $$$$ to spend--white black chinese martian they'd be there--Boston's not a bad town--you have to be kidding me.

LOL at anyone who dismisses this article. Boston has a history. Just tell Ewing how much the city has change and ask him what he thinks about it.

Boston has a rep of being the most racist northern city in the country. Mostly because of this:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4249418&ft=1&f=2100866

Posted by playa2:

http://celtics.bostonherald.com/celtics/view.bg?articleid=1011043&format=&page=2

Doc won’t play race card
By Steve Bulpett
Boston Herald Sports Reporter

Friday, July 13, 2007 - Updated: 01:18 AM EST

LAS VEGAS - Doc Rivers does not believe racial issues are a factor in getting players to the Celtics [team stats]. The Celtics coach offered a rebuttal yesterday to comments made by Washington Post columnist Michael Wilbon, comments that came in the wake of declarations by Kevin Garnett and others that they didn’t want to be traded to Boston.

According to Wilbon, the region’s poor racial climate is to blame. And while the veracity of those claims are between Wilbon and his sources, Rivers insists the perception is based on a faulty premise.

“Well, I think that’s the old opinion of Boston,” he said. “You know, it was in Bill Russell’s book years ago, but that’s changed obviously - and it’s good that it’s changing. But sometimes change happens first and the perception (changing) happens second.”

Rivers took exception to the notion that it’s difficult to get players to sign with the club, saying the Celtics, “Haven’t really been in the market of trying to sign free agents, when you think about it. In their glory years they didn’t have to. They already had good players on their team.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my opinion there are two cities in the NBA where Racial Tenions can be a factor with Black NBA Stars not wanting to go there. Those cities are Indiana and Boston.

Reggie Miller for all he did in Indiana , angry fans burned down his Mansion while he was away. Even his sister Cheryl Miller told him to leave after that ordeal.

philly used to have that rep and to some extent it still does. all northern cities have been better with race relations though considering where they were in the 80's.

Uhm... There are only about 400 NBA players. None of them are "black" in any practical sense of the word. They may be darker than Larry Bird, but living in enormous mansions and being followed by the press isn't exactly a lifestlye that has a lot in common with a conventional black experience.

I'm not saying these players don't encounter prejudiced or racist views. But these are princes in our society-- darling athletes. It's not like they have to struggle pick up a cab or anything.

[Edited by - tru on 07-14-2007 06:57 AM]

[Edited by - tru on 07-14-2007 06:57 AM]

I am not sure if you guys real the "True Hoop" articles but they seem to always do good stories about these types of subjects.

Harvey Araton on Racial Pandering in the NBA, Then and Now

January 5, 2007 7:39 PM

In the latest SportsMediaGuide interview with a sports columnist, Harvey Araton of The New York Times has fascinating points to make about how the press corps can affect a team's performance on the court, how paranoid the Knicks are these days, and a whole bunch of other stuff that I intended to quote... until I read this take on race pandering in the NBA that I found well worth sharing:

...Red [Auerbach] obviously was instrumental in positive things that happened in the 50s and 60s, with integrating the NBA and naming Bill Russell the first black coach -- and Red never let festering racial issues of the day enter his thinking and never let them affect what he did with his team. I quoted Bob Cousy saying, "Arnold was no civil rights leader -- he was about winning" and pointed out that in his desire to win he would do whatever needed to be done including integrating the team, and that was admirable. So Red had that reputation in the 60s as someone who opened up the league and he deserves all that credit.

Our book also contended that in the 80s the Celtics came to represent something different. What changed was the economics of the sport. When the Celtics never drew at home there wasn't a heckuva lot at stake. But in the 70s when the courts granted free agency to players in baseball and basketball you had to compete financially for players. Suddenly in the 80s the Celtics had to be financially competitive to maintain a level of success in the NBA. The case we made in the book and that I repeated in the column is that the Celtics became the white team in a black sport because of the financial benefits -- it helped them maintain their status and ability to win championships. We had players quoted saying they understood that bench players had to be white -- at the same time the Celtics were not very popular in Boston's black neighborhoods. So in effect we're saying Red wasn't doing it because he harbored racist feelings but that he understood the economics of the sport, and by positioning himself that way it gave him a better chance.

Q. But if Red was pandering to racist attitudes isn't that a racist attitude?

My definition of racist is someone who has contempt -- someone who hates or wants to deprive. I think I pointed out in that column that even Larry Bird was quoted a few years ago saying the NBA would be better off if it had another white superstar like himself. I don't think he meant more by it other than that there is part of the fan base that would prefer to watch white players � somebody they could identify with. I don't think that way myself.

A lot of what you see in the NBA is somewhat pandering to that mentality -- the objections to the image the black players create -- whether it's tattoos or the way they wear their hair. You could accuse David Stern of pandering the last two years with his rules, which come out of his business strategy. That's also part of the Auerbach legacy -- the 80s existed as much as the 60s. The point I was making was that Red gets credit for what he did in the 60s but that pandering should be part of his record as well.

Basketball History, Boston Celtics, League-Wide Issues


[Edited by - pharzeone on 14-07-2007 08:22 AM]

gary sheffield is a dumbass.

i'm from long island but have gone to school in boston for the last 3 years and m@ssholes are, on a whole, a pretty racist bunch (obviously that is a tremendously broad overview but thats my 2 cents).

I think any large population in any part of the world is racist against people who are different than them. Boston is a racist town not from hate but from a lack of diversification.

There is also a ton of built up tension in NYC among the races. So many neighborhoods in the NY are becoming ghettos of some sort. Ghettos are clusters of same ethnic populations.

I think there is more integration in the new southern growth cities than in the NorthEast.

I think Bostons historical problems are not why some players are not going there. Mostly is the lack of cap room.