Woodson a Prime Example of Diversity's Successes in NBA

[Admin]

http://www.nba.com/2...sity/index.html

Patience with coaches helps league land an 'A' in diversity

Only one coach in the Eastern Conference has been on the job longer than Mike Woodson

Posted Oct 1 2009 10:45AM

I'm sure David Stern doesn't sit in his midtown offices, twiddling his thumbs, waiting for the annual TIDES Racial and Gender Report Card to drop every year. But it must feel good to hear, year after year, that the NBA runs racial/gender diversity laps around its professional sports peers. Every year, TIDES (The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sports), headed by Richard Lapchick at the University of Central Florida, takes a look at the racial and gender makeup of players, coaches, team and league staffs and issues a report card on how diverse each is. The NBA got an A -- again.

Earlier this year, Lapchick told me that the NBA is so progressive that, at this point, diversity is "a non-issue." Although many folks (including me) wouldn't go that far, you can't escape taking note of not only the progress the league has made, but of the sustaining nature of that progress.

Earlier this week, while at the Atlanta Hawks' media day, Mike Woodson strolled past me to get reaquainted with the local Atlanta press. Woodson is an understated man. He's humble, a little soft-spoken and far from bombastic. You don't get any of the ego-vibes that you might get from some of his peers. Yet, he did seem to have a bit of a different air about him than he did back in 2005. That's what five resilient seasons as a coach can do for a guy.

Not saying that Woodson ever lacked self-confidence -- you don't become a professional coach if you're a sucker. He just comes off as more self-assured these days. Nothing about him says newbie coach or "dead man walking." He's now weathered enough storms to be the second-longest tenured coach in the Eastern Conference. In fact, only Jerry Sloan, Greg Popovich, Mike Dunleavy and Lawrence Frank have been running their squads longer than Woodson. Doc Rivers and Byron Scott are right there with Woodson.

Woodson's case is somewhat of a diversity touchstone -- Rivers, too, for that matter. Although there's no study that can quantify something abstract like diversity climates or racial attitudes, cases like Woodson's seem to indicate that we're moving closer to equality because he's been shown something that wasn't always offered to minority coaches -- patience. He's stayed around long enough to turn several losing seasons into consecutive playoff berths. He's stayed around long enough to patch-up a shaky relationship with Josh Smith. He's stayed around to oversee a team that, if he's about his business, is deep and talented enough to be a contender. None of that "OK, this squad has arrived, now let's turn it over to a qualified white man" thinking of yesteryear.

When asked why he's lasted this long in Atlanta, amid not-so-silent calls from fans and some media for his ouster, Woodson made it clear that ownership has made it a point to remain patient and let the coach grow right along with the players and teams. Of course, there are still whispers that, had the Hawks been willing to drop big dough on an Avery Johnson or Flip Saunders, Woodson could have been gone. The Pacers' Jim O'Brien recently got an extension after back-to-back 36-win seasons, while Woodson coaches this next season in contract limbo. But all that's noise that drowns out the reality that Woodson is still coaching the same team after five not-always-smooth years.

Before Doc won a ring, he had two losing seasons (one that included an 18-game losing streak) where the only constant communique coming from general manager Danny Ainge was that Doc was their guy.

Last week, some television commentators were discussing the joke that is diversity in college football, where only four of the 119 coaches are black. They said that, among other things, it's going to take greater success by the current black coaches before some of these athletic directors and booster clubs become more comfortable with not only hiring minorities, but sticking with them through difficult seasons. That's the biggie. You can take a flier on a dude and hire him, but the confidence and trust comes with sticking it out. In the NBA, minority coaches, like Woodson, are starting to benefit from longer leashes.

That's not always the case. The Sixers canned Mo Cheeks after just 23 games last season, even after he presided over a team that over-achieved the previous season. Sam Mitchell got a pink slip 16 games into a season that followed back-to-back playoff appearances by his Toronto Raptors. Washington dropped Eddie Jordan after 11 games last season despite his leading the Wizards to four straight playoff berths.

Some folks think that the TIDES report card masks some diversity problems that persist. There is only one black owner (the Bobcats' Robert Johnson) and that's tenuous. To have only three black general managers is unsettling. And, at the beginning of last season, just 28 percent of team professional administrative jobs were held by minorities. That doesn't mirror the court or benches.

So things aren't close to Utopian yet, nor will they ever be. Things are getting better, though. To watch Mike Woodson or Doc Rivers or Byron Scott crouching on the sidelines is the proof.

Vincent Thomas writes "The Commish" column for SLAM Magazine and is a contributing commentator for ESPN. His column appears weekly on NBA.com. Vince invites you to email him at vincethomas79@gmail.com or follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/VinceCAThomas.

[HawkItus]

Nice article. Our Owners if nothing are patient. Both Knight and Woodson had ample time to "put up or shut up"

[AHF]

I think anyone expecting the ownership, administrative, and other non-playing roles in the league to mirror the player population are living in a warped utopia. I am not sure I can identify why the demographics of the league are the way they are but I will venture to speculate that the factors leading to that highly atypical demographic aren't as applicable to the non-playing roles in the league.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Excellent article.

It would've been very easy for the ASG to can Woody after that 3rd season in which we won 30 games. The JJ injury that year probably saved his job. Plus it made financial sense to let him play out his contract, seeing that the Hawks, at that time, was still an afterthought for most ATL sports fans, behind the Falcons and Braves. Other from hardcore Hawk fans, ( which by the attendance numbers weren't that many ) there really wasn't any pressure to fire Woody.

Letting him coach that 4th year, and finally getting him a decent combo guard ( Bibby ) to play alongside JJ, made all the difference for Woody.

It's funny though. Most fans would still consider Woody a C- coach at best . . yet, expect the Hawks to legitimately challenge the "Big 3" for one of the 2 spots in the Eastern Conferene Finals. It kills people to actually give the guy some credit for having this team in the position they're in right now.

It's kind of wild that Sund gets praise for his GM work, but Woody gets none for doing all of the dirty work the past 5 years.

It would be messed up if Woody made the playoffs for the 3rd straight year, but got fired because the Hawks had another poor showing in the 2nd round against one of the Big 3.

If that happened, the pattern of Mitchell, Jordan, and Cheeks will continue through Woody. The organization would've been parient enough to let him mold and build the team up . . but not patient enough to see if he and the guys can challenge for a title.

[Swatguy]

I think anyone expecting the ownership, administrative, and other non-playing roles in the league to mirror the player population are living in a warped utopia. I am not sure I can identify why the demographics of the league are the way they are but I will venture to speculate that the factors leading to that highly atypical demographic aren't as applicable to the non-playing roles in the league.

Tell me, why would ("ownership, administrative, and other non-playing roles in the league to mirror the player population") be a "warped" utopia?

Edited October 2, 2009 by Swatguy

[AHF]

Tell me, why would ("ownership, administrative, and other non-playing roles in the league to mirror the player population") be a "warped" utopia?

The percentage of the population that is African-American is drastically lower than the percentage of NBA players that are African-American. Census data indicates 13.4% of the general population is African-American but the percentage of African-American players in the NBA has been reported to be 77%. That is a huge, huge disparity.

The pool of people qualified to hold administrative roles within an NBA organization is not so disproportionate, if anything positions in finance, etc. are likely disproportionate in the other direction with lower percentage of African-Americans holding certified public accountant licenses and other qualifications generally required for those positions. Certainly, the percentage of African-Americans among those obtaining advanced degrees in this country is lower than the percentage of African-Americans among the general population.

This states that African-Americans graduate from college at a per capita rate of 33% of white graduation rates (this is rate based, not total number based):

http://www.jointcenter.org/DB/factsheet/historical-trendsII.htm

It is a same assumption to assume that the pool is a least neutral with respect to qualified African-American applicants for administrative positions as compared to vastly disproportionate pool of people qualified to get a playing position in the NBA. We can also safely assume the % of individuals qualified to hold administrative positions in the NBA is much closer to the 13.4% of the population that is African-American than the 77% of the NBA population that is African-American.

Thus, the expecting the pool of individuals qualified to hold administrative positions to mirror the drastically disproportionate pool of individuals qualified to fill an NBA playing position is fundamentally flawed. I call that flawed viewed some kind of "warped utopia"..."utopian" because it is an idealic fantasy that diverges from reality to the extent that African-Americans as a group do not enjoy the same statistical advantages for adminitrative positions that they collectively do for playing roles and "warped" because it seems warped to me to hope for anything but racial equality in hiring for administrative positions

My big point is that the general population is the better pool for comparison than the pool of NBA players. The best pool, of course, for looking at administrative positions is the pool of people with the minimal qualifications for the positions (i.e., look at those qualified to hold a CFO position and then see whether there is a disparity between the qualified pool and the demographics of the people hired for those positions).