(04-01-2023 07:05 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  There is no constituency for straight out of HS players.

Yeah, it should have become clear that with the sides actually involved in the deal not saying much about the subject that getting rid of one-and-done wasn't happening. The players have no interest in removing it.

TBH, I think this is a fail for the NBA. While Kobe and Lebron were rare finds, and there's a lot "unproven" about talent that young (and that includes the aforementioned duo), never ignore that the entirety of the NBA benefitted from the hype those talents and their potential brought to the NBA. There's also a bit of an ethical failure on this, too, imo. NIL is a breath of fresh air for young talent, but, let's not pretend it's the panacea to solve all ailments. Hey, young talent can still get paid...folks, if they're ready, they are ready. Don't deny the sport this way.

Typical union group-think. "Pay your dues." You don't have much/any power coming through the door.

I do hope a deal like this makes international and development leagues better. Getting tired of the NBA's ****.

(04-01-2023 11:35 PM)Just Joe Wrote:  

(04-01-2023 05:29 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-01-2023 03:25 PM)Just Joe Wrote:  That’s a shame. There might be one or two football players who could’ve made the jump but it’s exceedingly rare (Herschel comes to mind and he’s probably the entire list) so the NFL’s policy makes sense. Garnett, Kobe, McGrady, Lebron are all examples that you can make the jump even if there are plenty of failures. Completely arbitrary and an attempt to protect current players from competition.

I don’t think it’s arbitrary - as an NBA fan, I think we’re having collective amnesia that for every Kobe and LeBron that was a success out of high school, there were 5 duds and that started compounding itself to have a negative impact on the quality of play.

I’ve said this elsewhere: if the only high schoolers entering the draft were LeBron/Kobe-level and the only high schoolers that NBA GMs took in the draft (particularly in the lottery) were LeBron/Kobe-level, then that would work great. The problem is that it didn’t work out that way in the years leading up to the one-and-done era: there were both too many high schoolers entering the draft that weren’t ready and too many NBA GMs setting their franchises back for years because they took a high school player too high out of fear of missing the next Kobe.

NBA franchise valuations are in the multi-billion dollar range even at the low end. The only concern that the NBA owners and NBPA should have is what’s best for the NBA. Period. I don’t begrudge them that at all even if college coaches may not like it.

But it’s possible. It’s not really possible in the NFL. It’s possible here and it’s just blocked arbitrarily.

The fact that it’s possible for a basketball player to be ready for the NBA at 18 doesn’t mean it’s arbitrary. Are lots of people ready to vote before age 18? Are lots of people ready to drink before age 21? Are lots of people ready to work in a factory before age 16? We have plenty of restrictions in society based on age. At the same time, it’s possible in the NFL, too - everyone saw Trevor Lawrence as a #1 draft pick for years before he was draft-eligible. Yet, very few seem to question the much more stringent NFL rule much.

In any event, NBA teams simply want to see a year of a player going up against higher level college, G-League or other pro competition before entering the draft. This is weirdly being discounted by a lot of people - this ought to be pretty obvious considering that so many top college/NBA prospects are by far and away the best athlete on the court in any given high school game… but wouldn’t necessarily be the case in college or the G-League and scouts need to see how they stack up against players of similar ability.

Plus, the main complaints about being “forced” to spend a year in college by both players and coaches have largely been mitigated or are essentially irrelevant now. NIL now makes it possible for star college basketball to receive substantial compensation that mitigates the need/desire to go to the NBA simply for the money. On the flip side, coaches didn’t like the one-and-done rule because of how it caused roster turnover, but the transfer portal is causing that now regardless of whether there’s a one-and-done rule or not (plus top programs can more easily replace one-and-done players via the transfer portal).

As others have said, there IS a major benefit to the age 19 rule (namely being able to see 1 year of a player against much higher level competition) while the negatives have been mitigated (such as NIL assuaging the concerns of top athletes not getting paid) and all of the constituencies involved (the NBA owners and the players) don’t really have much or any incentive to change the rule.