One-and-done rule debate continues

2009-10-30T02:55:21-04:00

2009-10-27T11:55:57-04:00

2009-10-30T02:55:21-04:00

NeilB

Glen Ellyn 891610

21 At 18, we allow people to sign and be bound by all manner of contracts, we allow them to join the military, in short we allow them to make their own decisions and sometimes those decisions are mistakes. I don't see any reason why an 18 year old should be prevented from declaring for the NBA draft. If he is drafted and cannot come to terms with the team that drafted him, why not let him go to college but still be committed to the team which drafted him whenever he leaves school, whether that's one year or four years. As well, I really fail to see the rationale behind the current rule that if a kid declares for the draft and signs a contract with an agent, he cannot go back to school. Don't we want to encourage kids to go to school? 7468107

2009-10-28T11:41:53-04:00

SyedAshrafulla

Los Angeles 352233

We live in a country where one is often required to have a 4 year degree to punch buttons on a computer, and other insanities. Companies arbitrarily require degrees for jobs that don't intrinsically require that type of education. So I have absolutely no sympathy for the whole "fairness" argument. Make a degree a requirement, just like your local data entry farm does. End of problem.

13 The reason a college degree is a requirement to those jobs is to stop people without college degrees from applying, because they can't be better than people with college degrees for those "data entry farm" jobs. To say that a forced college degree ends the problem is to completely dismiss the fact that, unlike in most jobs, you can actually produce and produce well as a high schooler in the basketball market. Working at 19 is hard to do in most jobs, even the "insanities" you speak of. It's not arbitrary; having a college degree for most jobs is a requirement because of the natural and obvious correlation between college degrees and level of intelligence. Basketball isn't about intelligence first. It's about talent first. Why do you think so many good players in the NBA left college early? 7437298

2009-10-29T04:02:28-04:00

Pac10baby

Los Angeles 274019

The reason a college degree is a requirement to those jobs is to stop people without college degrees from applying, because they can't be better than people with college degrees for those "data entry farm" jobs. To say that a forced college degree ends the problem is to completely dismiss the fact that, unlike in most jobs, you can actually produce and produce well as a high schooler in the basketball market. Working at 19 is hard to do in most jobs, even the "insanities" you speak of. It's not arbitrary; having a college degree for most jobs is a requirement because of the natural and obvious correlation between college degrees and level of intelligence.Basketball isn't about intelligence first. It's about talent first. Why do you think so many good players in the NBA left college early?

20 Many jobs that require college degrees couldn't care less about what subjects you actually studied (which is why English majors wind up in HR or PR or accounting). The degree delays entry into the overall job market and even limits who can get into specific job markets. It has little to do with "intelligence." Those employers are free to set such rules because they don't have protected monopolies -- such as the NBA, which is pretty much the only league for people interested in playing professional ball. That's why the age rule has to be part of the CBA. I would go the third way but make it a three year minimum but also provide a better living expenses stipend with the scholarship. 7450772

2009-10-28T14:10:36-04:00

SDK

Farmington Hills 102190

19 They keep saying the rule was passed to protect the kids. In reality, the rule was passed because all the NBA GM's were continually proven inept at predicting NBA success. They were sick and tired of drafting someone in the Top 10 who never made it off the bench. To avoid future embarrassment, they decided that they wouldn't have to decide if a 17 year old who has only played against people 12 inches shorter than they are is NBA material any more. Make them play in college against better competition before making them decide if they are worthy of a high draft pick. Everyone forgets that even if a high school player declares for the draft, there is no rule saying they HAVE to be drafted! Perhaps the GMs should only select players that can make it in the NBA. Why is the debate always shifted to the player making the poor choice rather than the team? Who can blame any 17 year old from wanting to take $5 million or more guaranteed without having to sit through freshman composition? 7441638

2009-10-28T14:03:55-04:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/423/011/thumb/vimes_avatar.jpg 171 SC

Spielman

Columbia 423451

18 "His theory is that the real motivation behind the rule was -??? surprise! ???- money. If a player comes into the league when he's older, that shaves time off the back end off of his contract, where he is making the biggest money." Well duh. The other major factor... the NBA desperately wants college basketball to succeed, because if they don't, they're going to need to sink a whole lot more money into minor league professional basketball, something that has always been a money sink for them. College basketball's popularity gives them a passel of developmental leagues that they don't have to pay for. Whether the NBA folks were in contact with the NCAA folks or not doesn't matter, because their interests coincide. The NBA doesn't want 18 year-olds who need time to develop, and the NCAA desperately wants them. If it tramples on the kids... well, when has that ever been a consideration? 7441449

2009-10-28T13:59:54-04:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/423/011/thumb/vimes_avatar.jpg 171 SC

Spielman

Columbia 423451

17 "His theory is that the real motivation behind the rule was -??? surprise! ???- money. If a player comes into the league when he's older, that shaves time off the back end off of his contract, where he is making the biggest money." Well duh. The other major factor... the NBA desperately wants college basketball to succeed, because if they don't, they're going to need to sink a whole lot more money into minor league professional basketball, something that has always been a money sink for them. College basketball's popularity gives them a passel of developmental leagues that they don't have to pay for. Whether the NBA folks were in contact with the NCAA folks or not doesn't matter, because their interests coincide. The NBA doesn't want 18 year-olds who need time to develop, and the NCAA desperately wants them. If it tramples on the kids... well, when has that ever been a consideration? 7441343

2009-10-28T13:24:01-04:00

JRCage

Pittsfield 902717

16 Here's another idea: A full minor league system like those of Major League Baseball and the National Hockey League. 7440235

2009-10-28T12:06:09-04:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/113/984/thumb/3a_037ElGuapo.jpg 74 ON

El Guapo II

London 114283

15 The problem is the NCAA not the NBA. Thier are too many restrictions on the players, that the NBA is a much more inviting option if you have neough talent then the college game. And besides forcing NBA players to have a degree makes no sense. Their getting paid millions to play basketball, not do the teams books, or do surgery on an injured ankle at half time, or sit their with some bogus brid course useless type degree. We don't live in a communist society, why should we make the NBA one? Plus I'm sure any of the high school kids that can't cut it in the NBA, will make enough over the span of their rookie contract to be able to afford to go to college if they decide to once their NBA carreer is over. 7437911

2009-10-28T11:49:47-04:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/383/39/thumb/SpongeBob.jpg 48 XX

Sleeper

Vangroovy, BC 38503

14 In real life, I am pure free market but in the world of sports I become a raving socialist. Give me a salary cap any day so the Pirates and Royals can compete with the Yankees. And make kids stay in school at least 2 years (Stern had it right with the 20 year age limit) before they can play in the NBA. I realize this is selfish on my part but I, the fan, am the one who pays for these guys salaries so why not give the fans what they want. Fans want to follow their college basketball teams knowing that they'll get to watch their favourite player for more than one year. And NBA fans would rather draft a guy they have watched dominate in the NCAAs for a few years instead of some no name from East Nowhere High. 7437520

2009-10-28T08:35:27-04:00

BigPapi2

Peabody 10189

5 We live in a country where one is often required to have a 4 year degree to punch buttons on a computer, and other insanities. Companies arbitrarily require degrees for jobs that don't intrinsically require that type of education. So I have absolutely no sympathy for the whole "fairness" argument. Make a degree a requirement, just like your local data entry farm does. End of problem. 7433242

2009-10-28T11:41:53-04:00

SyedAshrafulla

Los Angeles 352233

2009-10-28T11:09:46-04:00

Ayatollah Mugsy

Frisco 622537

12 The point of the minimum-age rule is to improve the caliber of play in the NBA, not to help the kids. The NBA has too many non-contributing projects on its rosters as it is. If anything, the NBA should raise its age limit so that the NBA Draft will be more like the NFL's -- where the emphasis is on finding athletes who are ready to make an impact. 7436303

Buzz Bissinger has an interesting op-ed piece in this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/opinion/27bissinger.html?_r=1&hp">morning's</a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/opinion/27bissinger.html?_r=1&hp"> New York Times</a> calling for the abolishment of the NBA's 19-year-old minimum age rule. The piece is worth a read because I think it describes the journey that many people have taken with regard to the rule, which was instituted in 2005. It sounded like a good idea, but upon closer inspection it doesn't hold up. The reason most often given to justify the rule was to keep youngsters from making a mistake. Bissinger provides some critical data to disprove that argument: A study by Michael McCann, a professor at Vermont Law School who is an expert on sports and legal issues, pointed out that of the 21 high school players who declared for the draft from 1975 to 2001, four became superstars -- Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Jermaine O'Neal and Tracy McGrady -- and only four never made it to the NBA. This trend held with the high school draft classes of 2002 through 2005, the year the ban was put in place: of the 26 players drafted, 20 were still playing through last season and three have become superstars: Amar'e Stoudemire, Dwight Howard and James. I give Bissinger credit for avoiding the mistake that too many commentators make, which is to attribute the rule, positively or negatively, to the NCAA. He infers that the NCAA was pushing the NBA along, but that is not true. There was literally no communication between the NBA and the NCAA on this issue. Both NBA commissioner David Stern and the late NCAA president Myles Brand told me as much when I interviewed them together for CBS two years ago. The NBA age minimum was agreed upon by Stern and Billy Hunter, the head of the NBA Players Association. Hunter told me that the only reason he agreed to the age minimum was because it was the final point of contention in the last collective bargaining agreement. Stern wanted the minimum to be 20, Hunter didn't want it at all, so they split the baby at 19 and closed the deal. Personally, I always opposed the age minimum, even though it has been an unmistakable boon to college basketball, the sport that helps me feed my kids. Yes, I know there are issues of academic integrity when kids are spending basically a semester and a half on campus, but from a purely marketing and business standpoint, would anyone argue that college hoops would have been better off the last few years if Greg Oden, O.J. Mayo and Kevin Love hadn't spent a year on campus? But I opposed the rule from a standpoint of basic fairness. Kids have a right to make the best choices for themselves, even if they made the wrong decisions. There is obviously a market for their services, and they should have the right to test it. A third-way rule has emerged from many circles in college basketball, and it is not a bad idea: Allow high school players to declare for the draft, but if they go to school, they have to go for two years. But based on my conversations with Hunter, I think that will be a tough sell. His theory is that the real motivation behind the rule was -– surprise! –- money. If a player comes into the league when he's older, that shaves time off the back end off of his contract, where he is making the biggest money. At any rate, the NBA and NBAPA are about to head into a very dicey negotiation for their next collective bargaining agreement, which will be complicated by the severe economic climate. If Hunter keeps his back up, I have a hard time imagining David Stern pushing this issue at the expense of the more pressing ones. If the third-way rule isn't adopted, I agree with Bissinger that the age minimum should be dropped. There is actually a much more simple solution to this conundrum. If David Stern really doesn't want these young kids in his league, he should tell his teams to stop drafting them. 83621 http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/889/088/thumb/davis_seth.jpg 0 CT

Seth Davis Hoops

Ridgefield 889748