Only one Freshman per year should enter the NBA

[CelticSince83]

It's a free country and these young men, largely from very poor backgrounds, should be free to maximize their income as soon as they would like.

Yet training in some form or another is required for most high paying jobs.  Why should athletics be any different?

Because athletics is talent-driven. Tech companies are similar, they don't let the lack of a degree stop them from hiring someone if they're a genius coder. "Oh wait, I notice that you didn't finish college. Mmmm, I'm sorry, we can't hire you then."

The only reason it's possible is because professional sports leagues are a government-supported monopoly in the USA.

Let's say there are two basketball leagues. One has no age limit and one does. Which league would get the best players and how fast would the league with the age limit change their policy?

You have to be a liberal, right?  Don't agree with a rule or policy because it "isn't fair."  I would hope the league is more concerned with protecting the quality of its product than what people think is fair.  Also, there are plenty of pro basketball leagues that don't have an age rule, and aren't as successful as the NBA, so no I disagree with your hypothetical which clearly wasn't very well thought out.

[saltlover]

It's a free country and these young men, largely from very poor backgrounds, should be free to maximize their income as soon as they would like.

Yet training in some form or another is required for most high paying jobs.  Why should athletics be any different?

Because athletics is talent-driven. Tech companies are similar, they don't let the lack of a degree stop them from hiring someone if they're a genius coder. "Oh wait, I notice that you didn't finish college. Mmmm, I'm sorry, we can't hire you then."

The only reason it's possible is because professional sports leagues are a government-supported monopoly in the USA.

Let's say there are two basketball leagues. One has no age limit and one does. Which league would get the best players and how fast would the league with the age limit change their policy?

Actually, you're a bit wrong there. There are plenty of companies that require a Bachelor Degree to employ those genius coders you mention.

Each company has its policies.

Also, while company may have their budget concerns, they don't operate under some sort of strict limit of how many people they can employ. Teams have limited roster spots to offer, many of those roster spots are being occupied by players who have no business sniffing the basketball court.

not to mention that in the business world, there are no guaranteed deals.  a company hires a coder, degree or not, and that coder doesn't live up to expectations they'll be looking for a new job.

take that guaranteed money away from rookies, I think you'll see a lot of these borderline players stay in school to improve their game so they can stick with the league.  (obviously there are injury exceptions to this). 

I think the basic rub against young players is that so many aren't good enough or prepared to play well in the league.  they're taking advantage of 'potential' to get a guaranteed contract that will pay them more money than most people will make in a lifetime.  They take up a roster spot that could go to another player that may cost the team a little more but would actually be better able to contribute to the team.  Take away the guarantee to put the onus on the players to be sure they're ready and/or remove their slot on the big league roster preventing the addition of player able to contribute and I think 90% of the dissatisfaction with this situation goes away.

I think the NBA benefits from guaranteed deals too.  A company hires someone new, and there's an expected learning curve while they become more productive.  They might be assigned to shadow someone, be given small portions of less important projects, etc.  Their development doesn't have to take away time from another employee's work, or hurt the overall company.  An NBA player, however, gets his on-court training at the expense of other, more productive players.  As coaches are graded on winning, they have no incentive to play guys who aren't ready.  However, if young players have 2-3 years of guaranteed contracts, coaches have more incentive to help them develop now, because the player will be there next year regardless. (Of course, coaches with less job security will be less likely to develop such players.)

That said, the real issue is that it's ridiculous 1/3 of NBA teams don't have a D-league team.  If they cared about the product, they'd have a development program.  Instead, they'd too cheap.

[wdleehi]

It's a free country and these young men, largely from very poor backgrounds, should be free to maximize their income as soon as they would like.

Yet training in some form or another is required for most high paying jobs.  Why should athletics be any different?

But you don't need specialized training to play in the NBA.  Athletes aren't like doctors.  A 5 year old can perform the basic skills required to play a sport for a living.  Sure a 5 year old isn't tall enough, strong enough, fast enough, etc., but a 5 year old can dribble a basketball and shoot it, which is basically all basketball is.  A 5 year old can throw and catch a football or throw and catch a baseball, or ice skate with a stick in his hand, or kick a ball, etc. 

Lebron James didn't need college to play in the NBA, heck he probably didn't even need high school to do it.  And, yeah not all players are Lebron James, but very few straight from high school players didn't at least see a second contract in the league.  In fact, a larger percentage of college seniors don't see a second contract than the high school players before them.  And that is 1st round picks we are talking about since I think only one guy went from high school and was not a 1st round pick. 

Some guys will benefit from college, some guys will be harmed, and some guys it probably doesn't matter much.  For example, Kenny Satterfield went from a projected late lottery pick after high school to a late 2nd round pick after two years of college.  He certainly didn't benefit from going to college and he is not alone.  Now sure, it is better for the NBA team to not waste a pick on a guy like Satterfield, then again if he didn't spend the two years in college and instead spent them on a NBA roster, maybe he would have played more than 75 games in the NBA.

Yet we see a ton of superior athletes not make it in the league because they lack the skill, never get the development time.  And we see lesser athletes become stars because of skill development. 



And more to the point, it is the employers right to decide what is required to be hired.

[Moranis]

It's a free country and these young men, largely from very poor backgrounds, should be free to maximize their income as soon as they would like.

Yet training in some form or another is required for most high paying jobs.  Why should athletics be any different?

But you don't need specialized training to play in the NBA.  Athletes aren't like doctors.  A 5 year old can perform the basic skills required to play a sport for a living.  Sure a 5 year old isn't tall enough, strong enough, fast enough, etc., but a 5 year old can dribble a basketball and shoot it, which is basically all basketball is.  A 5 year old can throw and catch a football or throw and catch a baseball, or ice skate with a stick in his hand, or kick a ball, etc. 

Lebron James didn't need college to play in the NBA, heck he probably didn't even need high school to do it.  And, yeah not all players are Lebron James, but very few straight from high school players didn't at least see a second contract in the league.  In fact, a larger percentage of college seniors don't see a second contract than the high school players before them.  And that is 1st round picks we are talking about since I think only one guy went from high school and was not a 1st round pick. 

Some guys will benefit from college, some guys will be harmed, and some guys it probably doesn't matter much.  For example, Kenny Satterfield went from a projected late lottery pick after high school to a late 2nd round pick after two years of college.  He certainly didn't benefit from going to college and he is not alone.  Now sure, it is better for the NBA team to not waste a pick on a guy like Satterfield, then again if he didn't spend the two years in college and instead spent them on a NBA roster, maybe he would have played more than 75 games in the NBA.

Yet we see a ton of superior athletes not make it in the league because they lack the skill, never get the development time.  And we see lesser athletes become stars because of skill development. 



And more to the point, it is the employers right to decide what is required to be hired.

Most players develop better in the pros than in college given the practice restrictions.

[KG Living Legend]

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

Correct.

 Like others have stated in the NFL, you play for three years minimum or redshirt and play two.


 It's your league. Don't give me this crap about lawsuits. You do whatever you want to impt the game.

 These kids should be paid in college but that's a whole bother issue. Those guys are the biggest crooks in basketball.

 The one player a year would be really fun, the scouts would decide who the one player is. It's really easy to pick the one player.

 The reason it would be fun is guys like Jabari Parker that lost out to Wiggins, would come back mad, also Embiid would come back mad and probably injured.

[Donoghus]

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

Correct.

 Like others have stated in the NFL, you play for three years minimum or redshirt and play two.


 It's your league. Don't give me this crap about lawsuits. You do whatever you want to impt the game.

 These kids should be paid in college but that's a whole bother issue. Those guys are the biggest crooks in basketball.

 The one player a year would be really fun, the scouts would decide who the one player is. It's really easy to pick the one player.

 The reason it would be fun is guys like Jabari Parker that lost out to Wiggins, would come back mad, also Embiid would come back mad and probably injured.

You screw over the earning potential of every other kid who wants to go but can't because of this ridiculous rule.  You cost them a year of NBA pay.

You might not like to hear the "crap about lawsuits" but it'd be anything but crap because you'd certainly see it. 

[KG Living Legend]

It is not the NBA's job to fix college sports (which needs to be fixed). 


They need to worry about what would be best for the NBA game.

[KG Living Legend]

 Wdl, a million Tp's for that. That's all I'm saying the kids get screwed in college they should get paid, but I don't really care.

 I care about the NBA and the quality of the game. It would improve it. Case closed.

[KG Living Legend]

 Donagus why is it a ridiculous rule? The NFL makes you go to school for three years.

[Moranis]

 Wdl, a million Tp's for that. That's all I'm saying the kids get screwed in college they should get paid, but I don't really care.

 I care about the NBA and the quality of the game. It would improve it. Case closed.

It may, it may not. 

[obnoxiousmime]

It's a free country and these young men, largely from very poor backgrounds, should be free to maximize their income as soon as they would like.

Yet training in some form or another is required for most high paying jobs.  Why should athletics be any different?

Because athletics is talent-driven. Tech companies are similar, they don't let the lack of a degree stop them from hiring someone if they're a genius coder. "Oh wait, I notice that you didn't finish college. Mmmm, I'm sorry, we can't hire you then."

The only reason it's possible is because professional sports leagues are a government-supported monopoly in the USA.

Let's say there are two basketball leagues. One has no age limit and one does. Which league would get the best players and how fast would the league with the age limit change their policy?

You have to be a liberal, right?  Don't agree with a rule or policy because it "isn't fair."  I would hope the league is more concerned with protecting the quality of its product than what people think is fair.  Also, there are plenty of pro basketball leagues that don't have an age rule, and aren't as successful as the NBA, so no I disagree with your hypothetical which clearly wasn't very well thought out.

Wow, that makes no sense at all. Conservative dogma is that the markets should be free. However, American sports leagues have protection from the government which is why there used to be competing leagues within one sport but were then all consolidated into one. At this point the leagues are so powerful and established that starting a competing league would be unfeasible. The pro sports league owners enjoy publicly funded stadiums which they then get to own and collude with their fellow owners to lockout players and force them to accept their terms. Since there is no other comparable league the players have very little leverage.

Yes, it's true that every company is different and has different hiring standards. However, the point is that DIFFERENT COMPANIES EXIST to offer competition. It would be illegal for tech companies to collude and artificially decrease all starting salaries for their hires. However, this is normal practice in the NBA. There is no other legitimate option for these athletes' services because the owners have banded together precisely to prevent it.

The owners do not have a gun to their head when they give out a guaranteed deal. The reason they do it is because there isn't enough talent to go around and they have to overpay even for average players. However, this is balanced out by the unfair, below-market deals rookies are forced to sign and the max contract limit on superstars. If you're going to complain that the money isn't going to players who deserve it, you have to also argue that LeBron James should probably make 150 million dollars a year not just for his on-court contributions but for selling the league worldwide.

The owners can't have it both ways. They limit what stars and rookies can make, then complain that mediocre players are soaking up all the excess money? This is the system they agreed to! If the cap is 70 million and you only have to pay your superstar 20, of course that extra 50 is going to be going to some overrated players by comparison. They kept expanding the league in the pursuit of money, then found out it meant there would be less and less of the truly elite talent to go around. That's when mediocre players get overpaid.

Finally, I don't understand how anybody can say the rookie contracts are risky and need to be limited when they already are so! Draft picks are a great way to fill your roster with cheap, controllable players. If you do get a bust you don't have to pick up their option, but how often does that happen? A player has to be a total, incontrovertible bust these days to not play out their rookie deal to completion. Isn't that the ultimate proof that GMs recognize what a bargain these deals are?

I love these ideas to modify and improve the system and the game. However, the age limit is a bad one that penalizes the players unfairly. It's just a convenient workaround to try and hide problems that exist with the draft, wage scale, the NCAA, the NBDL, etc.

[KG Living Legend]

 Another reason why two years for All players would be great for the NBA game is there would be much better rivalries between stars and the players would be more recognizable and bring fanbases with them from Major Programs.

[Donoghus]

 Donagus why is it a ridiculous rule? The NFL makes you go to school for three years.

This isn't the NFL.

This "one freshman per year" rule seriously screws over every other kid who is ready for the pros.  You're gonna to leave it up to some subjective decision-making in the process?  It's folly.

[KG Living Legend]

 And if you were running Microsoft and you decided you would hire one 19 year old prodigy every year for one million dollars per year, is there a problem with that?

 Of course not but cause its your private business and you can do Whatever you darn well please.
 It's not any different with the NBA. Private Business if you don't like it go play And 1 basketball.

[KG Living Legend]

 Donagus, to be clear I want all kids to play two years, looking at it from both sides there is usually one player that's much better than the rest which is the reason they changed the rule After they got there hands on Lebron.

 Donagus why is it a ridiculous rule? The NFL makes you go to school for three years.

This isn't the NFL.

This "one freshman per year" rule seriously screws over every other kid who is ready for the pros.  You're gonna to leave it up to some subjective decision-making in the process?  It's folly.