Only one Freshman per year should enter the NBA

[obnoxiousmime]

 Hogwash. Why did the league envoke the you must play one year rule. Mainly to improve the game.

  Mainly because they want to save money. Andre Drummond is averaging 18/16 for $3M a year. He wants to get out of that contract as quickly as possible, the owners want to keep him on those "low" wages for as many productive years as possible.

The main reason IS money, but I don't know if the extra contract year is the biggest part of the consideration to the owners. They are mostly concerned with cost certainty. High school players are harder to scout because of age but also because they're playing against other teenagers. The one year of college makes scouting a lot easier, though as we all know it is still very difficult. Case in point: Look at who ESPN ranked no. 2 here for high school recruits:

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/databaseresults?firstname=&lastname=&collegeid=&class=2010&position=&state=


And who's ranked no. 1 here:

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/databaseresults?firstname=&lastname=&collegeid=&class=2009&position=&state=

Sorry, I couldn't resist!

The other "money" reason is that the NCAA provides free marketing for them. Besides LeBron James, no high school kids have any name recognition. By playing a year in college, you're increasing their profile and making sure the draft remains a big deal, as opposed to the MLB draft where the average fan couldn't tell you who their favorite team drafted last. Remember, the NBA is a star-driven league and the draft is a huge publicity event for their future stars.

Still, I think the primary reason is cost certainty and easier scouting leading to the better players actually going to the worst teams (no way guys like Amare and Kobe slip so late in the draft if they had gone to college). The extra year of eligibility does matter, but the cost of that extra year could be easily made up with better scouting. For example, judging if a player is worth a max deal at age 23 as opposed to 22 probably makes a difference.

[BudweiserCeltic]

 Hogwash. Why did the league envoke the you must play one year rule. Mainly to improve the game.

  Mainly because they want to save money. Andre Drummond is averaging 18/16 for $3M a year. He wants to get out of that contract as quickly as possible, the owners want to keep him on those "low" wages for as many productive years as possible.

Not really saving money... it simply gives them more buying power to allocate their resources better, elsewhere. I'm all in favor of limiting money given to young players. I do side with veterans being able to have a bigger piece of the pie. But the main problem will still reside with limited roster space and the lack of an appropiate farm system that doesn't penalize active roster spots.

  Clearly they save a lot of money with rookie contracts. Whether they spend the money elsewhere is another issue.

A budget is a budget. If it's your position that rookie contracts allows teams to operate under a lower budget than they would've otherwise, that's a very valid position. And I guess a distinction need to be made on how a big market vs small market team would operate.

What we see more often than not are teams moving those types of players when their rookie contract is up (or about to) all with the intention of keeping their enterprise under budget.

So in all, considering salary cap rules considering luxury tax rules, I don't think it really boils down to saving money, but having the power to allocate their limited resources in other players if anything, trying to be competitive as it is. In my opinion that's the driving force in this, particularly with the high failure rate of picks as it is.

[wdleehi]

I want them to raise the age because it would be better for the fans to see NBA rookies ready to play the game.   


Of the major sports leagues in the US, only the NBA has so many new players not ready playing.  Whether it is physical maturity, mental maturity or just understanding of the game, the NBA is the worst.


NFL forces players three years of growth in college.  MBL and NHL have true minor league training. 


NBA really should choose one of those models to improve the impact new players could have on a team. 

[Donoghus]

This idea would lead to so many headaches. 

None more than lawsuits being thrown left & right.

Makes no sense.

[saltlover]

I think there is a compromise solution available.

3 round draft

To be selected in the first round you must have finished your sophomore year if American, or be 20 by end of the season if international.

To be selected in the second round, you must have finished your freshman year if American, or turn 19 by end of the season if international (the current rule for all draftees).  Obviously if you're eligible for the first round you're eligible for the second.

To be selected in the third round, you must have finished high school if Anerican, or turn 18 by the end of the season if international (this was the rule before the one-and-done era.)

All draft picks have four year slotting deals, not just the first round.  The first round decreases pick by pick more slowly than now, and the values keep decreasing through pick 90.  (Right now the final first round picks have a slot of under $1 million.  I'd raise that to around $1.5 million, and probably up to pick 45 the slot is over $1 million).  First round picks get three years guaranteed, second round picks get two years guaranteed, third round picks get one year guaranteed.

Draftees no longer need to count against the 15-man roster.  Teams can keep first rounders in the D league one year, second rounders 2 years, and third rounders up to three years.  The guaranteed rookie salary does not start counting until the first year a draftee is brought to the NBA (although the value of the contract applies for the first year the player is brought up, not drafted).  The D league salary should be raised a bit -- $50k for a player's first season there, $75k for his second, $100k for his third.

A team that wants to remove the draft pick's cap hold must send the player down for the season.  A team that keeps the hold on the book's can bring the player up later in the year, but the player must be paid his full salary if brought up, not a pro-rated amount.  If he is never brought up during the season, despite his cap hold being maintained by the team, then it's treated as if the team kept him in the D league the entire year (as described above).

Owners benefit from this solution because they can develop players more before paying them large amounts of money.  Players benefit because 1st rounders get more money, more players get guaranteed deals (and deals guaranteed longer), and players who want to turn pro earlier have that option.  Furthermore, roster spots at the end of the 15-man roster, which were once used just for rookies not ready for game action can now be used on veteran players making the minimum, who otherwise would have been out of a job.

[max215]

There shouldn't be any collegiate requirement to enter the NBA Draft.

Correct.

[manl_lui]

I would also like to add

how would the NBA even regulate that? So is the freshmen also playing a lottery - see if they are lucky to be that ONE freshmen allowed to enter the NBA draft?

you either ban ALL freshmen from entering the draft or have no limit

[BudweiserCeltic]

I think there is a compromise solution available.

3 round draft

To be selected in the first round you must have finished your sophomore year if American, or be 20 by end of the season if international.

To be selected in the second round, you must have finished your freshman year if American, or turn 19 by end of the season if international (the current rule for all draftees).  Obviously if you're eligible for the first round you're eligible for the second.

To be selected in the third round, you must have finished high school if Anerican, or turn 18 by the end of the season if international (this was the rule before the one-and-done era.)

All draft picks have four year slotting deals, not just the first round.  The first round decreases pick by pick more slowly than now, and the values keep decreasing through pick 90.  (Right now the final first round picks have a slot of under $1 million.  I'd raise that to around $1.5 million, and probably up to pick 45 the slot is over $1 million).  First round picks get three years guaranteed, second round picks get two years guaranteed, third round picks get one year guaranteed.

Draftees no longer need to count against the 15-man roster.  Teams can keep first rounders in the D league one year, second rounders 2 years, and third rounders up to three years.  The guaranteed rookie salary does not start counting until the first year a draftee is brought to the NBA (although the value of the contract applies for the first year the player is brought up, not drafted).  The D league salary should be raised a bit -- $50k for a player's first season there, $75k for his second, $100k for his third.

A team that wants to remove the draft pick's cap hold must send the player down for the season.  A team that keeps the hold on the book's can bring the player up later in the year, but the player must be paid his full salary if brought up, not a pro-rated amount.  If he is never brought up during the season, despite his cap hold being maintained by the team, then it's treated as if the team kept him in the D league the entire year (as described above).

Owners benefit from this solution because they can develop players more before paying them large amounts of money.  Players benefit because 1st rounders get more money, more players get guaranteed deals (and deals guaranteed longer), and players who want to turn pro earlier have that option.  Furthermore, roster spots at the end of the 15-man roster, which were once used just for rookies not ready for game action can now be used on veteran players making the minimum, who otherwise would have been out of a job.

I don't agree with your idea of restrictions of players eligible per round mainly because you're restricting teams who have a draft pick advantage in certain rounds to pick the player they're interested in. I really don't think that's much of an issue.

Your other idea, which is in tune with what I think is the real problem here I can get behind of without looking carefully at your proposal. The main problem has and will always will be the waste of roster spots first and foremost. You solve that particular problem, the rest should be gravy.

[wayupnorth]

Fans once again taking the side of billionaires over millionaires. The one-and-done rule should be illegal and is borderline racist. Unfortunately the player's union does not have enough leverage to change it because they have bigger fish to fry.

People need to be more skeptical whenever they hear the words "for the good of the game." The translation is almost always "for the good of the owners over the players."

Besides, what's wrong with players coming out when they're not "ready"? Due to the rookie salary scale, the ones who are worth anything are still making less than they're worth over those four years.

There's no evidence that a player who came out earlier than was expected ended up having a bad career because he missed out on a year of college. Chances are that player was evaluated incorrectly to begin with and wasn't ever going to be that good regardless. Yes, there isn't any way to verify that for sure but the demand for talent is so great in the league that anybody with promise is usually given ample opportunity to succeed.

Lol "racist".


Wow.

[spikelovetheCelts]

And who gets to decide who that Freshman is? As we all know, Success in the college level isnt a guarantee a player is going to be a good pro.

There is a long list of players coming out early who have failed. I think a freshman who is drafted and realizes after he practices at pro level and needs more time in college should have the right to go back for another year and the team drafting him keeps his rights. They could also run the d league not during the college season so kids could do both that would be for the good of the game. The NBA could also have 18 players and send 6 to Dleague games as well.

[saltlover]

I think there is a compromise solution available.

3 round draft

To be selected in the first round you must have finished your sophomore year if American, or be 20 by end of the season if international.

To be selected in the second round, you must have finished your freshman year if American, or turn 19 by end of the season if international (the current rule for all draftees).  Obviously if you're eligible for the first round you're eligible for the second.

To be selected in the third round, you must have finished high school if Anerican, or turn 18 by the end of the season if international (this was the rule before the one-and-done era.)

All draft picks have four year slotting deals, not just the first round.  The first round decreases pick by pick more slowly than now, and the values keep decreasing through pick 90.  (Right now the final first round picks have a slot of under $1 million.  I'd raise that to around $1.5 million, and probably up to pick 45 the slot is over $1 million).  First round picks get three years guaranteed, second round picks get two years guaranteed, third round picks get one year guaranteed.

Draftees no longer need to count against the 15-man roster.  Teams can keep first rounders in the D league one year, second rounders 2 years, and third rounders up to three years.  The guaranteed rookie salary does not start counting until the first year a draftee is brought to the NBA (although the value of the contract applies for the first year the player is brought up, not drafted).  The D league salary should be raised a bit -- $50k for a player's first season there, $75k for his second, $100k for his third.

A team that wants to remove the draft pick's cap hold must send the player down for the season.  A team that keeps the hold on the book's can bring the player up later in the year, but the player must be paid his full salary if brought up, not a pro-rated amount.  If he is never brought up during the season, despite his cap hold being maintained by the team, then it's treated as if the team kept him in the D league the entire year (as described above).

Owners benefit from this solution because they can develop players more before paying them large amounts of money.  Players benefit because 1st rounders get more money, more players get guaranteed deals (and deals guaranteed longer), and players who want to turn pro earlier have that option.  Furthermore, roster spots at the end of the 15-man roster, which were once used just for rookies not ready for game action can now be used on veteran players making the minimum, who otherwise would have been out of a job.

I don't agree with your idea of restrictions of players eligible per round mainly because you're restricting teams who have a draft pick advantage in certain rounds to pick the player they're interested in. I really don't think that's much of an issue.

Your other idea, which is in tune with what I think is the real problem here I can get behind of without looking carefully at your proposal. The main problem has and will always will be the waste of roster spots first and foremost. You solve that particular problem, the rest should be gravy.

The point of the eligibility restrictions per round is to encourage players to stay in college longer, but not force them to do so.  It potentially rewards their development in college by offering a higher salary, more guaranteed contract years, and fewer years under team control in the D league.  Again, this is a compromise proposal.  Owners would raise the age limit tomorrow if they could.  I think that's dumb, myself, and am totally in favor of players getting to make their own decision.  This compromise gives players that option.  At the same, it incentivizes players to stay in college, which is what owners want (for a variety of reasons).  I don't quite understand what you mean by the draft pick advantage comment, however.  Are you saying if they have a first round pick, but no second round pick, and they want a player who's only eligible in the second round, they won't be able to pick their player of choice?  If that's you're point, I'm not too worried.  That's what trades are for.  And unless they were going to be picking first in the second round, there was no guarantee they could get that player anyway.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I think there is a compromise solution available.

3 round draft

To be selected in the first round you must have finished your sophomore year if American, or be 20 by end of the season if international.

To be selected in the second round, you must have finished your freshman year if American, or turn 19 by end of the season if international (the current rule for all draftees).  Obviously if you're eligible for the first round you're eligible for the second.

To be selected in the third round, you must have finished high school if Anerican, or turn 18 by the end of the season if international (this was the rule before the one-and-done era.)

All draft picks have four year slotting deals, not just the first round.  The first round decreases pick by pick more slowly than now, and the values keep decreasing through pick 90.  (Right now the final first round picks have a slot of under $1 million.  I'd raise that to around $1.5 million, and probably up to pick 45 the slot is over $1 million).  First round picks get three years guaranteed, second round picks get two years guaranteed, third round picks get one year guaranteed.

Draftees no longer need to count against the 15-man roster.  Teams can keep first rounders in the D league one year, second rounders 2 years, and third rounders up to three years.  The guaranteed rookie salary does not start counting until the first year a draftee is brought to the NBA (although the value of the contract applies for the first year the player is brought up, not drafted).  The D league salary should be raised a bit -- $50k for a player's first season there, $75k for his second, $100k for his third.

A team that wants to remove the draft pick's cap hold must send the player down for the season.  A team that keeps the hold on the book's can bring the player up later in the year, but the player must be paid his full salary if brought up, not a pro-rated amount.  If he is never brought up during the season, despite his cap hold being maintained by the team, then it's treated as if the team kept him in the D league the entire year (as described above).

Owners benefit from this solution because they can develop players more before paying them large amounts of money.  Players benefit because 1st rounders get more money, more players get guaranteed deals (and deals guaranteed longer), and players who want to turn pro earlier have that option.  Furthermore, roster spots at the end of the 15-man roster, which were once used just for rookies not ready for game action can now be used on veteran players making the minimum, who otherwise would have been out of a job.

I don't agree with your idea of restrictions of players eligible per round mainly because you're restricting teams who have a draft pick advantage in certain rounds to pick the player they're interested in. I really don't think that's much of an issue.

Your other idea, which is in tune with what I think is the real problem here I can get behind of without looking carefully at your proposal. The main problem has and will always will be the waste of roster spots first and foremost. You solve that particular problem, the rest should be gravy.

The point of the eligibility restrictions per round is to encourage players to stay in college longer, but not force them to do so.  It potentially rewards their development in college by offering a higher salary, more guaranteed contract years, and fewer years under team control in the D league.  Again, this is a compromise proposal.  Owners would raise the age limit tomorrow if they could.  I think that's dumb, myself, and am totally in favor of players getting to make their own decision.  This compromise gives players that option.  At the same, it incentivizes players to stay in college, which is what owners want (for a variety of reasons).  I don't quite understand what you mean by the draft pick advantage comment, however.  Are you saying if they have a first round pick, but no second round pick, and they want a player who's only eligible in the second round, they won't be able to pick their player of choice?  If that's you're point, I'm not too worried.  That's what trades are for.  And unless they were going to be picking first in the second round, there was no guarantee they could get that player anyway.

Oh OK, I didn't see that angle at all. Now I understand where you're coming from. But I guess in the end, if you can solve the roster spots problem, that eligibility issue wouldn't be much of a concern. I guess what it would do is improve the NCAA... it stops becoming much of an NBA concern I'd think other than hoping players come in with better education and what not (then it's a matter of D-League systems vs. College systems as developmental places).

The other side of it is that you may also see more of this young players foregoing college all together and go play professionally in Europe. I'm sure that's part of the concern and why some of this measures haven't been sought after as proactively as I think they should. But if in the end they end up playing in the NBA one way or another, I don't think that's much of an issue all told.

[BDeCosta26]

Personally, I think the whole rule forcing college is ridiculous and any player should be able to be drafted out of HS if he's good enough.

But if the NBA is gonna basically force guys to play college ball they need to make them go for the whole thing. The one and done rule is ridiculous because it's just forcing guys to show up on a campus for six months, not give a crap about school, and go straight to the league anyways. If your gonna make them go, which I think is ridiculous, they should have to go for the full time needed to graduate.

[obnoxiousmime]

Fans once again taking the side of billionaires over millionaires. The one-and-done rule should be illegal and is borderline racist. Unfortunately the player's union does not have enough leverage to change it because they have bigger fish to fry.

People need to be more skeptical whenever they hear the words "for the good of the game." The translation is almost always "for the good of the owners over the players."

Besides, what's wrong with players coming out when they're not "ready"? Due to the rookie salary scale, the ones who are worth anything are still making less than they're worth over those four years.

There's no evidence that a player who came out earlier than was expected ended up having a bad career because he missed out on a year of college. Chances are that player was evaluated incorrectly to begin with and wasn't ever going to be that good regardless. Yes, there isn't any way to verify that for sure but the demand for talent is so great in the league that anybody with promise is usually given ample opportunity to succeed.

Lol "racist".


Wow.

I don't think it's an outrageous statement at all. I'm certainly not the first person to mention it.

Other sports have athletes go directly to pro leagues without going to college. Nobody has ever made the patronizing argument that those kids would be better off "getting an education."

I want to clarify that I haven't necessarily heard those comments here and am not accusing anybody on the board of being racist. The ideas here are more about fans selfishly wanting the league to be better but penalizing the players to do so, since that would be easier than reforming things like the draft, the NBDL, and the rookie wage scale. The onus should be on the owners to come up with a system that is both good for the product and also fair to the players. An arbitrary age limit is just a convenient, crappy solution to a bigger issue (which also happens to save them money).

The holier-than-thou "but these kids need an education!" argument used to be a very popular during the "thug" days of the league from the mid 90s until the mid 2000s. What a coincidence.

[wdleehi]

Don't force them to go to college.  Allow them to go to the NBDL.  Let's say a player has to be three years out of high school (or equivalent for overseas players).  The players can go to college overseas or the NBDL.  As a benefit to both the player and the team that is developing the player, when he is eligible, the team can put in a draft pick bid for him.  A first round bid means the player gets paid equal to the first pick in the draft and costs the team a lotto level pick or two non lotto first round picks.