[MemphisX]

...we are blessed with this gem

Players who want to enter the NBA from high school still can put in for the draft, but they will be required to go to the NBDL first. There they will collect their full rookie-scale salaries — a wrinkle that has made the proposal palatable for Hunter. NBA teams that own the players' rights can let those players develop in the minor league and bring them up when they are ready.

So you are telling me that Cleveland fans, for example, would have been paying top dollar to watch Ricky Davis do his thing while Low Gator fans would have been able to watch LeBron for about $5. Yeah that will go over well.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[ATLien]

Why even have an age limit in the first place then? Just give teams the option to send players who aren't ready to an affiliated NBDL team. Makes sense to me.

 

[jokeaward]

When they are ready

So Lebron would start Opening Day last year, wouldn't he? Or after a few games in the NBDL.

This is great!

 

[Philo]

I'm sure it has been posted before, but can anyone give me a rundown on the league's motivation for this rule?

 

[MemphisX]

I'm sure it has been posted before, but can anyone give me a rundown on the league's motivation for this rule?

 

[Kmasonbx]

The reason for the rule is because the owners want a more mature league, especially after that incident in Detroit. The players actually want it also. The reason they want is because the less kids that can make the jump early means the less cheap contracts they take away from veterans. Teams will draft a 18 or 19 year old kid and pay him around a million or less to sit at the end of the bench instead of signing a 34 year old vet and paying him 4.5 million to do the same. The players union wants the vets to get their contracts, but under the latest wrinkle that doesn't even do that.

I just don't like the actual age number, to me it's stupid. The reason is it is such a subjective rule. There are kids like Amare Stoudemire who had a bunch of problems when they were growing up so by the time they were done with high school they were already 20, so the rule wouldn't have even effected Amare. A lot of guys are 19 when they graduate so they only have to stay in college for 1 year. Then you have guys who have late birthdays so they won't be able to leave until after their junior year.

I think the rule should be a player has to be removed 2 years from the graduating class to go pro, in the NFL it's 3 years removed, which works very well, because it's uniform in every case no matter how old a player is.

 

[Hakeem]

But isn't a person's level of maturity generally based on their age, rather than how long ago they graduated?

 

[jokeaward]

I like the age limit, the NFL doesn't have to "worry" about 18 yr-old int'l players.

4.5 million seems high, but you're probably right. GM's have screwed things up.

 

[Darvin Ham]

This may force many young stars to go in Europe.

 

[Kmasonbx]

This may force many young stars to go in Europe.

I don't think it will because if you go overseas you wont get the fame back here that you would've had you gone to college. More than money players like the game and notoriety of being a basketball player. If you can wait 2 years to get the money but get notoriety in the mean time they won't mind waiting. If they go to Europe they have to learn a new language, new customs all their friends and family will be here, just because you didn't want to wait 2 years to make some money?

 

[NYKBaller]

It's called a farm system, excellent decision.

 

[Amplifier]

Trajon Langdon,Michael Olowokandi,Shawn Respert.

 

[MemphisX]

Trajon Langdon,Michael Olowokandi,Shawn Respert.

You don't understand. They are not trying to prevent draft busts, that will always happen, they want a vehicle to develop players that can't get court time in the NBA.

 

[BBB]

It's called a farm system, excellent decision.

Certainly.

This would suit all parties- ensure better play in the league for the fans; no young guns "stealing" vets' spots; and rookies actually getting minutes to play instead of just rotting at the end of the bench.

 

[E.H. Munro]

The reason for the rule is because the owners want a more mature league, especially after that incident in Detroit.

I hate to break it to you, Artest was a 20 year old when he was drafted, the riot was started by a Detroit fan (who was much older than 20) and most of the participants (aside from O'Neal) would have been unaffected by the age rule. In second, college does zilch for maturity, getting a job and taking responsibility for yourself does that. In third, baseball & hockey players regularly turn pro at age 18 and are just fine, basketball players will be too. In fourth, the US college athletic system is a glorified plantation, basketball & football players are exploited by a corrupt system, and their reward is, generally speaking, a free pass from classes, under the table pay, and an environment that stresses circumventing the rules. Yeah, great way to develop character in 18 year olds.

The players actually want it also. The reason they want is because the less kids that can make the jump early means the less cheap contracts they take away from veterans. Teams will draft a 18 or 19 year old kid and pay him around a million or less to sit at the end of the bench instead of signing a 34 year old vet and paying him 4.5 million to do the same. The players union wants the vets to get their contracts, but under the latest wrinkle that doesn't even do that.

Vet scrubs aren't going to get 4 million per for their scrubbery. There might be more league minimum jobs available for the scrubs, but that's it.

I think the rule should be a player has to be removed 2 years from the graduating class to go pro, in the NFL it's 3 years removed, which works very well, because it's uniform in every case no matter how old a player is.

Basketball isn't football. The reason that the NFLl put the rule in place is that football rosters are huge, and minor league ball expensive (the reason they go the NFL-Europe route). Basketball already has a minor league, they just need to manage and use it properly. If you were really concerned for the players, you'd be arguing for a baseball/hockey style farm system, so that players develop properly (both personally & professionally) rather than insisting that they give their services away for free for two years.

 

[BigMac]

the rule is dumb if it goes on. If a player can play when he is 18 let him go to the nba if he can't then send him to the NBDL.

 

[kflo]

if you can draft a guy who's capable of putting up 20 and 10 in 4 years, but 4 & 2 today, or having a guy capable of putting up 10 & 5 for the next 4 years, many many teams will take the 4 & 2 guy. these kids are often not drafted because they can play when they're 18, they're drafted because of what they'll be able to do when they're 22. the tempation is great, and the risk, because of rookie salary scale, isn't that great. the problem is, the nba product suffers as a result.

the nba is responding to complaints about their league and the product on the floor, and they see this as a way to answer those complaints. they wouldn't do it to intentionally hurt their product. it wouldn't make sense.

 

[Minstrel]

if you can draft a guy who's capable of putting up 20 and 10 in 4 years, but 4 & 2 today, or having a guy capable of putting up 10 & 5 for the next 4 years, many many teams will take the 4 & 2 guy. these kids are often not drafted because they can play when they're 18, they're drafted because of what they'll be able to do when they're 22. the tempation is great, and the risk, because of rookie salary scale, isn't that great. the problem is, the nba product suffers as a result.

How is the NBA product hurt? They don't kick 20/10 guys off rosters to accomodate these guys. They kick off old players on the other end of the production curve...weak producers headed downwards (while high schoolers are weak producers headed upwards).

In fact, I would say high schoolers are better to have in the game than over-the-hill bench scrubs. A 18 year old Kobe Bryant occasionally had a brilliant game mixed into his poor rookie stat line. Over-the-hill bench scrubs are going the other way, so aren't likely to have any games of greatness.

At the very best, it's the difference between a 7 ppg / 3 rpg high schooler and a 10 ppg / 5 rpg veteran. That slight difference has a discernable effect? I think that's a major stretch. And it's at least countered (if not more than countered) by what I said above: high schoolers can have flashes of their future greatness; veterans with little left aren't likely to have flashes of past greatness.

 

[kflo]

the nba becomes part development league. it's not about flashes of brilliance. there are flashes of brilliance that go along with a steep learning curve. alot of sloppy play and mistakes. they're not the guys who give their team the best chance at winning. they're (generally) not the best players NOW. they're there for the long-term payoff.

it makes the product weaker because you've got a lower maturity level, a lower basketball iq, a lower understanding of how the game's played. part of this of course is the type of ball they're playing in the aau leagues and summer leagues. those flashes of brilliance are part of the problem - the league, right or wrong, is getting a reputation as a flash without substance league, at least in relation to the past.

this is being driven by the front office, not the players union. what do you think the motivation is?

 

[kflo]

baseball and hockey often draft the 18 year old talent as well. what doesn't often happen is that you see them in a major league game. why is that? because they're not ready, and there are other options.