PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on how to fairly fix the NBA's early entry process



Malastein
04-17-2017, 04:40 PM
While I think most would agree that Zach Collins would be better off developing for another season at Gonzaga, it's important to recognize that there are individuals such as LeBron James who were able to contribute at a high level directly out of high school. I don't think the one and done rule does any favors to either the players like Markelle Fultz and Ben Simmons or the numerous players who aren't quite ready like Zach Collins. What I would love to see implemented is some sort of basketball committee that would approve players wishing to enter the NBA out of high school to allow the top end talent to be able to go directly. This prevents a lot of players who simply weren't ready to enter the league, and became washed up after their first or second contract. If a player is declined early entry by the committee then they must spend at least 2 years in college, but can declare after both their sophomore and junior seasons in order to receive feedback. This creates a culture where being a serious student matters, but it also allows more protection for players who may in fact be better off finishing their degree.

maynard g krebs
04-17-2017, 04:53 PM
Seems like such a committee would wind up getting sued on a regular basis. I like the baseball model; everybody's free to declare out of HS, but if you go to college you're not eligible for the draft for 3 (maybe 2?) years.

thespywhozaggedme
04-17-2017, 05:01 PM
While I think most would agree that Zach Collins would be better off developing for another season at Gonzaga, it's important to recognize that there are individuals such as LeBron James who were able to contribute at a high level directly out of high school. I don't think the one and done rule does any favors to either the players like Markelle Fultz and Ben Simmons or the numerous players who aren't quite ready like Zach Collins. What I would love to see implemented is some sort of basketball committee that would approve players wishing to enter the NBA out of high school to allow the top end talent to be able to go directly. This prevents a lot of players who simply weren't ready to enter the league, and became washed up after their first or second contract. If a player is declined early entry by the committee then they must spend at least 2 years in college, but can declare after both their sophomore and junior seasons in order to receive feedback. This creates a culture where being a serious student matters, but it also allows more protection for players who may in fact be better off finishing their degree.

Um....... so you want some sort of arbitrary committee deciding who can and cannot choose to enter a specific workforce? I really don't know what to say. By the way it is the NBA that put this rule in place, no one else.

I mean your entire premise is predicated upon the idea that other people know what's best for the individual. I'm 100% against this notion in every way shape and form.

23dpg
04-17-2017, 05:03 PM
Seems like such a committee would wind up getting sued on a regular basis. I like the baseball model; everybody's free to declare out of HS, but if you go to college you're not eligible for the draft for 3 (maybe 2?) years.

This!

gu03alum
04-17-2017, 05:15 PM
I think people should be free to do what they want including going straight to the NBA out of high school. I see no reason why they should have to wait 1, 2, 3, or 4 years to go to the NBA if a team in the NBA wants them now.

cjm720
04-17-2017, 05:16 PM
It should be gone. If Zach gets drafted. He's ready. It's about fulfilling a dream and getting paid at this point.

Hoopaholic
04-17-2017, 05:30 PM
If nba does not wan to align like MLB
Why can't NCAA do 2 year contractual scholarships?

kitzbuel
04-17-2017, 05:39 PM
I think people should be free to do what they want including going straight to the NBA out of high school. I see no reason why they should have to wait 1, 2, 3, or 4 years to go to the NBA if a team in the NBA wants them now.

Yup. If they want to go, let 'em go. It will improve the college game. The kids who do play college ball would try hard to make their own chance.

GonzagasaurusFlex
04-17-2017, 05:49 PM
Exactly. 18 years old = free to choose your own career path....NBA needs to stop preventing young men from doing so.

ZAG 4 LIFE
04-17-2017, 06:05 PM
The Baseball model is very sound... would love to see that happen
With hoops... but not holding my breath.

ZagDad84
04-17-2017, 07:20 PM
The Baseball model is very sound... would love to see that happen
With hoops... but not holding my breath.

Baseball model won't work. NBA has D-League while baseball has 100's of Single "A", "AA" and "AAA" teams.

If memory serves me correctly the NBA changed the 18 rule because they had a large number of HS graduates who "thought" they were ready or were told they were "ready" and then they did not get drafted or make a NBA team, but because they signed with an agent, they could not go to college to improve their skills. Having the kids go one year to college at least gives them some high-level coaching and the chance to improve their level of play.

After watching the Ben Simmons story, the 19-year rule is really a joke. Simmons only went to classes to maintain is eligibility (barely) and he did not even sign up for the 2nd semester because LSU did not make the tournament. He did not want to go to school and only did so because he had too. I do not think this was the intention of the 1-year college rule. Some people think the colleges take advantage of the 18-year olds under today's system but the agents took advantage of the 18-year olds under the old system. The kids were taken advantage of, it just changed who took advantage of them.

Let's be real, just because a player is drafted in the lottery or in the first round does not mean they would not benefit (sometimes greatly) from an additional year (or two) of collegiate coaching. Zach Collins certainly would benefit. However, the improvement in draft position and the associated salary increase is may not be worth the risk of injury. There is nothing wrong with this position, it is what works for him. The NBA frequently drafts on potential, see Adam Morrison. He never lived up to his potential, but he made a very good living from the NBA and from overseas. Absolutely nothing wrong with his decision. With today's rookie contracts, a lottery player could be set for life if he invested his 1st contract wisely (frequently does not happen). For the majority of 18 year old kids, most are not equipped to handle the realities of 7-figure contracts, the behavior expected from an NBA player, or the realities of living oversees. Some are, most are not. IMO, the one and done does not really benefit the player or the NBA.

Consider allowing the 18-year olds to play in the NBA. If they don't make the NBA allow them to play in the "D"-League with each year in the "D" league equalling one year of college eligibility. If you do elect to go college, then require a minimum of a 2-years before you can be eligible for the NBA (and the "D"-League).

Sorry, I am not a fan of the one and done rule. It may be the method for best performance year in and year out, but it does little to do with college athletics. If you want to go directly to the Pros, then do so. If you want to go to college, then be a college student/athlete. Using the colleges as a graduate level AAU team is not my cup of tea and anything we can do to limit this process would be an improvement.

ZagDad

gu03alum
04-17-2017, 08:16 PM
I'm not sure why people think that going to college for another year would be more beneficial than going professional. At college you are limited in how much coaching you can get. You have to attend classes and do homework. When you become a professional you can work full time on your game. You have the best coaching. You play against the best competition.

Zagceo
04-17-2017, 08:26 PM
So funny reading about people trying to fix "their" problem with one and done.

its America...it's called Freedom .....get over it....IMHO of course.

zag944
04-17-2017, 09:53 PM
If memory serves me correctly the NBA changed the 18 rule because they had a large number of HS graduates who "thought" they were ready or were told they were "ready" and then they did not get drafted or make a NBA team, but because they signed with an agent, they could not go to college to improve their skills. Having the kids go one year to college at least gives them some high-level coaching and the chance to improve their level of play.


This is the perception but I think there were actually very few for whom this is the case. Mark Cuban had a quote:

"I just think there's a lot more kids that get ruined coming out early or going to school trying to be developed to come out early than actually make it," Cuban said. "For every Kobe (Bryant) or (Kevin) Garnett or Carmelo (Anthony) or LeBron (James), there's 100 Lenny Cookes."


....but when you look at the numbers, there is probably a Hall of Famer for every "Lenny Cooke". Further, many of the so-called busts had long and profitable careers...others had careers cut short by injury, something that can happen to anybody.

Putting no research into this whatsoever, I'd guess their success rate is probably better than or comparable to say, college juniors and seniors that went over the 1995 through 2005 period (Garnett to the age limit), if only because of the blatantly obvious talent and potential that these guys had.

I think the NBA was suffering a big image problem at the time and this was put there to help out perception a little bit. I think the dress code rules and the crack down on anything that could potentially start a fight happened at roughly the same time.

GeorgiaZagFan
04-17-2017, 10:12 PM
Seems like such a committee would wind up getting sued on a regular basis. I like the baseball model; everybody's free to declare out of HS, but if you go to college you're not eligible for the draft for 3 (maybe 2?) years.

I think the baseball model works very well and is good for the player as well as the sport! If a player is NOT ready right out of high school they have options...go to Europe, go to a 4 year college (with 3 year committment, can't be drafted until after junior year) go to a junior college and try again next year, or have the NBA further develop their NBDL and play there.

This one and done crap is bad for the player and bad for the sport! Kids like Fultz and Ben Simmons from last year don't even have to attend classes after January 1 ...which gives teams that have an abundance of 1 and done players an advantage.

GrizZAG
04-18-2017, 02:10 AM
I remember a TV presentation on how difficult it is for a 17-18 year old to have a life in NBA no matter how good they were. Kevin Garnet was interviewed extensively and he was pretty miserable. Additionally there were adult activities that came into conflict with social adjustments for many of them as well. At the time they were looking for a solution to what they considered a problem that set up these kids for difficulties due to age differential. What we have today is what they came up with apparently.

kitzbuel
04-18-2017, 03:48 AM
I remember a TV presentation on how difficult it is for a 17-18 year old to have a life in NBA no matter how good they were. Kevin Garnet was interviewed extensively and he was pretty miserable. Additionally there were adult activities that came into conflict with social adjustments for many of them as well. At the time they were looking for a solution to what they considered a problem that set up these kids for difficulties due to age differential. What we have today is what they came up with apparently.
I don't think anyone disagrees that jumping to the NBA is the right choice for a lot of these players. But forcing them to sit in a collegiate holding tank for a year against their desire is not the answer.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Birddog
04-18-2017, 04:30 AM
It's a long off season so plenty of time to read this.
https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/indexablecontent/uuid:b083287c-be5c-400b-8d57-5872076dfbab


However, when examining classification by year of
eligibility (freshman, sophomore, etc) only, it was concluded that collegiate NBA prospects
leaving school early had better overall NBA careers than those who stayed in school. The results
suggested freshmen prospects benefit more than any other class level from leaving school early
to enter the NBA. Base salary, longevity, and production decreased as a player’s collegiate
classification increased

The authors conclusions begin on pg 36

zagfan24
04-18-2017, 06:00 AM
It's a long off season so plenty of time to read this.
https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/indexablecontent/uuid:b083287c-be5c-400b-8d57-5872076dfbab



The authors conclusions begin on pg 36

Very interesting upon a brief read over. I'm a bit surprised they did not include draft position as a covariate. That would have the added advantage of factoring out the fact that better players are more likely to leave early, which otherwise greatly skews his outcome statistics.

JPtheBeasta
04-18-2017, 08:32 AM
The correlation makes sense. It makes sense that a player would develope more quickly if not distracted by having to study for class and such. Do they take into account, however, that the early entry guys are most likely more athletically gifted than the people who stay all four years?

TexasZagFan
04-18-2017, 08:41 AM
The correlation makes sense. It makes sense that a player would develope more quickly if not distracted by having to study for class and such. Do they take into account, however, that the early entry guys are most likely more athletically gifted than the people who stay all four years?

No doubt that 4 years at GU definitely messed with Steven Gray's head. The poor kid actually took up drama! :lmao:

JPtheBeasta
04-18-2017, 09:18 AM
No doubt that 4 years at GU definitely messed with Steven Gray's head. The poor kid actually took up drama! :lmao:

:)

That should at least help with flops. I wonder if BYU makes acting class a prerequisite?

ZagDad84
04-18-2017, 09:42 AM
IMO the one and done rule has less to do with the players who actually are good enough to enter the NBA at 18 and more to do with the players who "think" they are good enough or are "told" they are good enough to play in the NBA but in reality don't "currently" (and may never have) the skills need to play in the NBA.

There are what, something like 351 D-1 college basketball teams with an average of 13 players per team. So there are something like 4560+ players in D-1. The number of one and doners is what. maybe 30 per year? So to establish a rule which impacts only 30 or so players out of that 4,560 (only about 0.6%) seems ridiculous, unless the rule was written for somebody other than the qifted one-and-doners who are actually good enough to make the NBA.

I hate the one-and-done rule, but I don't want to penalize a kid for making a decision at 18 on the advice of his parents, HS coach and/or AAU coach which could impact their college eligibility. Let the 18 year olds declare for the draft and see where they are drafted (or not drafted) in most cases. If they don't sign a contract let them sign up for a college. You need some rules about signing an agent and taking compensation prior to the draft, but let reality come to some of these kids without jeopardizing their future if they are not good enough to make it in the NBA but are good enough to get a scholarship.

By far and away, the majority of college basketball players (the 4,560+ on any given year) do not make their living playing professional basketball either in the NBA or abroad. College is not the be all to end all by any means. However, stats have shown, the earning ability of a college grad is significantly better than a non-college grad. If you can't make a living playing basketball somewhere, having the opportunity to make a decent living doing something else is a great ability to fall back on, particularly if somebody else paid for the education/training. In many cases the kid and/or parents can't afford to send their kids to college so getting an athletic scholarship is the only way they are going to get to go to college.

So, get rid of the one-and-done rule but put in provisions that the kids without the ability to make the NBA (at 18) don't screw themselves out of a chance, if they want it, to go to college on an athletic scholarship.

ZagDad

zag944
04-18-2017, 09:54 AM
The thing about all of these types of things is that it is an educated guess and the people that make a lot of money to make such guesses don't even have that great of a batting average. I assume this proposed committee would consist of NBA GMs and talent scouts, even the best of whom whiff on a good amount of picks?

I think the implication was that Collins would have been trapped in this web, not able to leave yet because of this committee. Which would really suck for him because the NBA powers that be are probably going to take him in the middle of the first round 12 months after such a decision might have been made.

I would say that GU is an amazing program with wonderful coaches, staff, trainers, etc and I would think most players become better with each year of seasoning they get here. But:
-I don't think being a better player necessarily increases draft stock (Pargo and Harris probably wouldve been picked had they left early, Turiaf may have gone higher than he did, I doubt Daye couldve gone higher than 15th had he spent another year in college under the NBA's microscope, etc).
-There are a lot of schools that aren't as nurturing an environment as ours
-There are some great franchises in the NBA with some of the best basketball teachers and strategists in the world. A lot of players may improve more and faster there.

tinfoilzag
04-18-2017, 11:35 AM
The NBA had too much risk giving their entertainers (basketball players) guaranteed salaries at 18. There wasn't enough reliable information on a high school player to make good decisions on contracts. They worked with the NCAA (which doesn't have to pay the entertainers) so they could greatly reduce the risk of a bad investment. This is why NBA's D-league is an afterthought; the real developmental league is the NCAA.

It's a win-win-loss. The NCAA gets world-class entertainers for peanuts and reaps the profits. The NBA gets to evaluate the talent to make much better decisions on its investments. Then you place a barrier of entry on "amateur status", wrap it up in the old "it's good for the children" marketing campaign and you are good to go.

The only loser is the entertainer who loses out on a year of employment at millions of dollars and is not able to monetize a bidding war for their potential. The players also absorb all the risk of injury (which would be covered by a guaranteed salary).

The one-and-done rule is not broken, it's working exactly as intended.

Hoopaholic
04-18-2017, 11:41 AM
The NBA had too much risk giving their entertainers (basketball players) guaranteed salaries at 18. There wasn't enough reliable information on a high school player to make good decisions on contracts. They worked with the NCAA (which doesn't have to pay the entertainers) so they could greatly reduce the risk of a bad investment. This is why NBA's D-league is an afterthought; the real developmental league is the NCAA.

It's a win-win-loss. The NCAA gets world-class entertainers for peanuts and reaps the profits. The NBA gets to evaluate the talent to make much better decisions on its investments. Then you place a barrier of entry on "amateur status", wrap it up in the old "it's good for the children" marketing campaign and you are good to go.

The only loser is the entertainer who loses out on a year of employment at millions of dollars and is not able to monetize a bidding war for their potential. The players also absorb all the risk of injury (which would be covered by a guaranteed salary).

The one-and-done rule is not broken, it's working exactly as intended.

we can agree to disagree on some of your premise statements

students CHOOSE to come to college and are not forced to do so, with the theory of education

NOTHING prevents the high school student (any age in high school) to go overseas and make money if that is their desire

student athletes are being paid by colleges...just apparently not at a rate that you think is correct

I prefer to have student athletes and to have those who want education and play basketball do so.....others simply go to Europe for two years

TexasZagFan
04-18-2017, 11:51 AM
we can agree to disagree on some of your premise statements

students CHOOSE to come to college and are not forced to do so, with the theory of education

NOTHING prevents the high school student (any age in high school) to go overseas and make money if that is their desire

student athletes are being paid by colleges...just apparently not at a rate that you think is correct

I prefer to have student athletes and to have those who want education and play basketball do so.....others simply go to Europe for two years

Fine discussion, but a moot point until 2023. It's all in the NBA's hands, and they love having the free farm system provided by the NCAA.

Hoopaholic
04-18-2017, 11:55 AM
Fine discussion, but a moot point until 2023. It's all in the NBA's hands, and they love having the free farm system provided by the NCAA.

no its not....it is perfectly legal for a high school player to go overseas and sign a contract. They become eligible to be drafted at age 19 and one year removed from graduation date....so if a 17 year old Junior wants to go to Japan and sign a pro contract and leave high school he can. He becomes eligible when he turns 19 for the draft


Also perfectly legal to sign a D league contract and not go to college same applies that you have to be 19 and one year removed from a high school graduation


these are perfectly legal for a athlete to bypass NCAA and go make money and then become draft eligible.....it is the athletes choice

thus why I think NCAA should do a mandated 2 year contract with huge buyout clause for student athletes

tinfoilzag
04-18-2017, 12:05 PM
we can agree to disagree on some of your premise statements

students CHOOSE to come to college and are not forced to do so, with the theory of education

NOTHING prevents the high school student (any age in high school) to go overseas and make money if that is their desire

student athletes are being paid by colleges...just apparently not at a rate that you think is correct

I prefer to have student athletes and to have those who want education and play basketball do so.....others simply go to Europe for two years

I didn't say or even imply that students are forced to go to college.
If you are a top recruit out of high school, the most you would get oversees would be around $100k for a season. Top NBA lottery picks make around $50k a game. Which seems like a better move?
I didn't claim to know how much student athletes should be paid by colleges. I think a free market should decide that.

I'm just calling it like I see it. If you believe that kids are going to places like North Carolina to fulfill their dream of getting a sports management degree, you are entitled.

Hoopaholic
04-18-2017, 12:40 PM
I didn't say or even imply that students are forced to go to college.
If you are a top recruit out of high school, the most you would get oversees would be around $100k for a season. Top NBA lottery picks make around $50k a game. Which seems like a better move?
I didn't claim to know how much student athletes should be paid by colleges. I think a free market should decide that.

I'm just calling it like I see it. If you believe that kids are going to places like North Carolina to fulfill their dream of getting a sports management degree, you are entitled.

my point is it is a free market

you can go overseas and command the free market price
you can go to D league and command the free market price
you can elect to sit out and work at the local 7-11 then try the draft
you can elect to sit out and work out then go try draft
you can elect to go to an NAIA school and work full time then to the draft
you can elect to go to D1 school and then declare


seems to me alot of free market options out there for kids to choose what is their best interest

but none of the choices seem to protect the D1 school investment(s)...and that is where I believe a mandatory 2 year contract to be honored by both sides with heavy opt out penalty for those who want to side step the agreement is proper for all parties

Zagceo
04-18-2017, 12:45 PM
but none of the choices seem to protect the D1 school investment(s)...and that is where I believe a mandatory 2 year contract to be honored by both sides with heavy opt out penalty for those who want to side step the agreement is proper for all parties

Serious question..........Who needs protecting? ......."protect the D1 school investment"

TexasZagFan
04-18-2017, 12:45 PM
no its not....it is perfectly legal for a high school player to go overseas and sign a contract. They become eligible to be drafted at age 19 and one year removed from graduation date....so if a 17 year old Junior wants to go to Japan and sign a pro contract and leave high school he can. He becomes eligible when he turns 19 for the draft


Also perfectly legal to sign a D league contract and not go to college same applies that you have to be 19 and one year removed from a high school graduation


these are perfectly legal for a athlete to bypass NCAA and go make money and then become draft eligible.....it is the athletes choice

thus why I think NCAA should do a mandated 2 year contract with huge buyout clause for student athletes

Great points, Hoop. However, methinks we're dealing in a different generation where young men want to stay closer to home. When I turned 18, I was ready to get the heck out of the house. How many of us have kids in their mid-20s still living at home? Count me as a guilty one, and we've got his dog to boot.

25 years ago, leaving home to play overseas or in a D-league was a better option for today's players. In today's game, there's at least 50 other places to hang out for their year, with great facilities, plenty of games on TV for parents and family to watch, and then the coming out party known as the NCAA tournament.

I'm with you hoop, but when I turned 18, my stepfather opened the door to the fridge and said, "grab a beer anytime you want." After a week on my firefighter's job, my mom fixed me my favorite meal: abalone steaks, artichokes, and a couple of beers.

I remember COL Boyle tapping a keg for us after every Saturday ROTC exercise, and he was there drinking with us 18-20 YO's.

I really like your idea of the 2 year contract. I simply think the confluence of the AAU system, major shoe companies, and the NCAA have engineered a monopoly for young men whose dreams are to play in the NBA. Everything I've read about international teams indicates players have a problem getting paid, and there's very little money in the D-leagues for that 18 YO, certainly not enough to support his family. So it's go to college to build your brand before you hit the NBA.

TexasZagFan
04-18-2017, 12:50 PM
Serious question..........Who needs protecting? ......."protect the D1 school investment"

CBS, TNT & ESPN have their investments to protect that are larger than the D1 schools. We just don't see it, because the WCC generates squat in the TV department. Big East's contract is $40-$50 million a year, or $4-$5 million per school. That's roughly 2/3 of what the Zags put into the basketball program every year.

tinfoilzag
04-18-2017, 12:51 PM
my point is it is a free market

you can go overseas and command the free market price
you can go to D league and command the free market price
you can elect to sit out and work at the local 7-11 then try the draft
you can elect to sit out and work out then go try draft
you can elect to go to an NAIA school and work full time then to the draft
you can elect to go to D1 school and then declare


seems to me alot of free market options out there for kids to choose what is their best interest

but none of the choices seem to protect the D1 school investment(s)...and that is where I believe a mandatory 2 year contract to be honored by both sides with heavy opt out penalty for those who want to side step the agreement is proper for all parties

You left 2 out. College schools cannot bid for your services. You cannot play in the NBA. Free market means free market not "you can sell your services to anyone you want, except the highest bidders".

Hoopaholic
04-18-2017, 01:15 PM
You left 2 out. College schools cannot bid for your services. You cannot play in the NBA. Free market means free market not "you can sell your services to anyone you want, except the highest bidders".

free market means corporations can make their own determinations of who they want to hire .....you cant force nor mandate a corporation to consider applicants


hope your kidding when you say college schools cannot bid for your services......really so you really believe that Duke vs Pepperdine are not selling their program, their school and the fringe benefits of their program?

tinfoilzag
04-18-2017, 01:35 PM
free market means corporations can make their own determinations of who they want to hire .....you cant force nor mandate a corporation to consider applicants


hope your kidding when you say college schools cannot bid for your services......really so you really believe that Duke vs Pepperdine are not selling their program, their school and the fringe benefits of their program?

I never argued that corporations cannot make their own decisions on who to hire.

The NBA made a rule that benefits the NCAA a.k.a one-and-done. The NCAA has a system that benefits the NBA a.k.a showcase high-level talent.

The key word is 'fringe'. Colleges cannot pay kids a salary. They offer as many qualitative benefits as possible within the rules of the NCAA but they can't give them a percentage of the gate or share in ad revenue or TV deals. They cannot be paid performance bonuses. College kids cannot be paid to endorse products, or sell memorabilia, or charge for appearances.

CarolinaZagFan
04-18-2017, 01:52 PM
Be careful what you wish for. We've fared pretty well over the years with the current setup. Keep the status quo.

ZagDad84
04-18-2017, 04:02 PM
The NBA made a rule that benefits the NCAA a.k.a one-and-done. The NCAA has a system that benefits the NBA a.k.a showcase high-level talent.



This can be argued that the one and done rule benefits the NCAA. It improves the product for a few choice universities and the TV execs love the great TV it makes, but for the vast majority of the 351 colleges playing D-1 basketball, the rule does not "benefit" them with the exception of the possible increase in revenue brought to the conferences by the ever increasing TV contracts.

However, it is hard to imagine that if the one and done rule was abolished, the value of the TV contracts would be diminished.

ZagDad

Hoopaholic
04-18-2017, 04:06 PM
I never argued that corporations cannot make their own decisions on who to hire.

The NBA made a rule that benefits the NCAA a.k.a one-and-done. The NCAA has a system that benefits the NBA a.k.a showcase high-level talent.

The key word is 'fringe'. Colleges cannot pay kids a salary. They offer as many qualitative benefits as possible within the rules of the NCAA but they can't give them a percentage of the gate or share in ad revenue or TV deals. They cannot be paid performance bonuses. College kids cannot be paid to endorse products, or sell memorabilia, or charge for appearances.

Nor should they IMO

The primary purpose of attending college is being lost. It is student athlete intended upon obtaining degree

If your desire is anything short of that go to Europe if d league in ny. Jew and leave the scholarship slots for those who embrace the student athlete culture

CDC84
04-20-2017, 10:03 AM
The real thing that changed all of this was the establishment of the rookie salary cap.. The worst decision the NBA ever made. Without it there would be no need for an age limit, and you would see more and more players staying in college to better their basketball skills under some of the finest teachers of the game that the world has, and more of the players would advance further and further toward their degrees. There is a reason why guys like Larry Johnson and Stacey Augmon stayed at UNLV all four years despite their immense lottery pick level talent: without a cap, players didn't dare enter the league until they damn well knew they were 100% ready for the competition and ready to play big minutes. There was no guaranteed money, and yet the real players made even more money than they do today. Here's an article from the late 90's (the examples are old) that outlines the problem perfectly:

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/1998/05/10/cap10.html

BTW - the age limit is not going away. It's worthless debating it, IMO. It's way more likely to go to 20 than it is to be eliminated. Once the NBA found out how much their league's popularity went sky high when people got to know Derrick Rose as a player instead of a guy on a recruiting chart, and once they found out that they no longer had to teach players what a down screen was (most elite prospects lack a knowledge of the X's and O's of the game) and how to play defense (big time HS recruits are told by their HS coaches to never take risks on defense because the team cannot afford for the player to foul out), they knew they had struck gold.

thebigsmoove
04-20-2017, 12:10 PM
The real thing that changed all of this was the establishment of the rookie salary cap.. The worst decision the NBA ever made. Without it there would be no need for an age limit, and you would see more and more players staying in college to better their basketball skills under some of the finest teachers of the game that the world has, and more of the players would advance further and further toward their degrees. There is a reason why guys like Larry Johnson and Stacey Augmon stayed at UNLV all four years despite their immense lottery pick level talent: without a cap, players didn't dare enter the league until they damn well knew they were 100% ready for the competition and ready to play big minutes. There was no guaranteed money, and yet the real players made even more money than they do today. Here's an article from the late 90's (the examples are old) that outlines the problem perfectly:

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/1998/05/10/cap10.html

BTW - the age limit is not going away. It's worthless debating it, IMO. It's way more likely to go to 20 than it is to be eliminated. Once the NBA found out how much their league's popularity went sky high when people got to know Derrick Rose as a player instead of a guy on a recruiting chart, and once they found out that they no longer had to teach players what a down screen was (most elite prospects lack a knowledge of the X's and O's of the game) and how to play defense (big time HS recruits are told by their HS coaches to never take risks on defense because the team cannot afford for the player to foul out), they knew they had struck gold.

I agree regarding the rookie salary cap. You change the rookie salary cap rules, you kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Allow all players to go pro out of High School or whenever they want, but instead of allowing them to sign huge contracts right out of the gate, offer minimum salaries that increase with each season of college eligibility under their belt. By the time they are juniors you remove the minimum salaries and allow full rookie salary cap wages. Reduces the number of early entrants for money and also reduces the risk teams take drafting on potential. You are left with more kids staying in school. Similar to the way MLB does it, but with more control.