NBA Hopes to Raise Age Limit Again.

[Legend_Returns]

What the NBA needs to do is impose an age limit on owners...

Something along the lines of:

If you are older than 65 and are a US Senator, you may not own an NBA team!

[ba-dum-bum-tsssssss]

[ReasonablySober]

-= original quote snipped =-



Apparently the player's development has nothing to do with the rule change or they would be bringing it back down to 18 instead of moving it up to 20. It looks like all of the players in the last class before drafting 18 year olds was outlawed have received sufficient development opportunities.

First rounders Martell Webster and Andrew Bynum start and the other first rounder, Gerald Green, was given lots of chances before he proved he wasn't NBA material.

Second rounder C.J. Miles has 26 career starts for one of the best and deepest teams, Ricky Sanchez is a career minor leaguer like many college second rounders, Monta Ellis is becoming a core player, and Louis Williams, Amir Johnson and Andray Blatche are all being given chances to show if they can play well consistently.

These were the cream of their high school crop. Only one (Ellis) is looking like he can be All-Star someday. Bynum maybe.

Compare them similarly hyped players that went to college for at least one season.

Carmelo Anthony
Chris Bosh
Luol Deng
Andre Iguodala
Marvin Williams
LaMarcus Aldridge
Rudy Gay
Rajon Rondo
Kevin Durant

Hrmm.

[emunney]

How many drafts are you cherry picking those players from?

[ReasonablySober]

How many drafts are you cherry picking those players from?

I went back to 2002 I think. Maybe 2003. The same drafts that had guys like Robert Swift, Sebastian Telfair, JR Smith and Dorrell Wright.

[emunney]

How many drafts are you cherry picking those players from?

Looks like 5. Let's take the best high school players from the last 5 drafts that allowed them.

Andrew Bynum
Monta Ellis
Dwight Howard
Josh Smith
LeBron James
Amare Stoudemire
Tyson Chandler

Which list are you taking?

It doesn't prove anything, though. The paths that these players took is not what resulted in them becoming good to great players. It's been hard work and a willingness to take instruction, or, in the case of LeBron, just ungodly amounts of every desirable basketball trait.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

Players can develop just fine or bust no matter what route they take. That isn't the reason for the age limit. It's to keep them from diluting the NBA's talent pool until the've developed into professional-caliber players.

Had Kobe Bryant gone to college, he would've become a superstar just like he did without it. But his 9 ppg rookie season would have been a 20 ppg college season instead, and he would have been the #1 pick in '98, instead of Olawakandi.

[emunney]

Sure, I agree with that. I think that increase in uncertainty, though, probably makes things more interesting and increases interest in the league in different ways. And there are certainly countless examples of guys who are drafted out of college who have no business being in the league and bring down the level of the on court product.

I don't feel bad for these guys, but I didn't feel bad for NBA talent evaluators either. Both of them get plenty of good choices, and it's up to them to make the correct decision. In the case of raising the age limit, though, you're discriminating purely on the basis of age, not on basketball ability. It just rubs me the wrong way on principle.

[Bernman]

-= original quote snipped =-

The free market to get onto a rookie scale contract? You didn't really think that through did you?

The most salient point of the thread, which was never counterpointed by zizek.

If you're championing a free market system, it should be a two-way street for both the producers (the players) and the consumers (the franchises).

NBA teams' hands are tied by slotted rookie contracts which force them to pay unproven players multi-millions before they're sure what they're receiving. And they don't have to just pay a one time fee, but rather over 3-4 years, even though in year one they may have known they made a mistake (Reece Gaines). It would be like going to the grocery store, and buying a container of milk, but only getting smell the outside of the container beforehand to determine if it's spoiled, and shake it to determine if it's full. Then you're handcuffed into paying for a duplicate container 4 times, and the store has no obligation to repay you in the chance they didn't give you your money's worth. Buyer be very wary. We tricked you unsuspecting consumer. Of course the store will suffer in the long run if they don't appease the customers, but they weren't out of business until they made more than enough money to retire on and move down to an abandoned lot in Cancun with all the other defunct grocery stores.

Abolish slotted and guaranteed contracts for rookies. Allow franchises to pay minor league wages as long as minor league caliber players are performing in front of 10's of 20's of people in Bismark, North Dakota. They don't get paid the NBA contracts they individually negotiated after the draft until the franchise who selected them promotes them twice from the minors, or they are in the NBA for a set period of time (say 3 months). Then the NBDL won't be worthless (DrugBust), because teams will have incentive to send "prospects", improving the overall competition in the league, and in turn the players who spend time developing there. At any time during their rookie contract, if the player doesn't perform in the NBDL, or after a season in the NBA, they can be released (at the risk of the franchise if the player still has untapped potential).

If players don't find playing for scraps in front of desolate crowds, appealing, then they should be intelligent enough to remain in college until that won't be an issue.

[El Duderino]

-= original quote snipped =-


If you're championing a free market system, it should be a two-way street for both the producers (the players) and the consumers (the owners).

NBA teams' hands are tied by slotted rookie contracts which force them to pay unproven players multi-millions before they're sure what they're receiving. And they don't have to just pay a one time fee, but rather over 3-4 years, even though in year one they may have known they made a mistake (Reece Gaines).

Abolish slotted and guaranteed contracts for rookies. Allow franchises to pay minor league wages as long as minor league caliber players are performing in front of 10's of 20's of people in Bismark, North Dakota. They don't get paid the NBA contracts they individually negotiated after the draft until the franchise who selected them promotes them twice from the minors, or they are in the NBA for a set period of time (say 3 months).

It already is a two-way street

First of all owners aren't "forced" to pay any unproven player for 3-4 years that's taken in the draft, owners agreed to that in a bargaining process. This wasn't imposed on them without their ok.

Plus, there is a good and bad for the owners in this situation, not just bad. If a player that's drafted performs well or very well, the owners control the rights to that young player for five seasons at a price much cheaper than what the player would get if he was put on the free market to be signed by anyone.

The Hornets are only paying Chris Paul 3 million this year, 4.5 next year, and 6 million the following season even though he's a legit MVP candidate. Indiana only has to pay Granger 7 million over the next three seasons. Memphis will on have to pay Rudy Gay 12 million over the next four years, i could go on and on.

So why should the players accept a system that would allow owners to control the rights of very good performing young players for five seasons at often vastly below market money, but then also let owners assume no risk and not have to pay players NBA money that don't perform well during their rookie contracts? Any players union leader that would accept a shaft job like that should get fired on the spot.

The trade off for owners is simple. If their team makes a smart draft choice, they get a young player under their control for five years at way under market money than if the players could be a free agent sooner, but if they make a poor evaluation and draft a bust, they have to pay the guy NBA money for three years. Sounds plenty fair to me, make smart choices you get a bargain, make poor ones you are basically lighting money on fire.

[emunney]

They only have to pay the guy NBA money for two years. That's when the team options start. It's not a bad system for the owners.

[emunney]

Bern, the rookie salary scale was a system devised by the owners. It's beneficial to them, not to the players as you seem to imply. How many of the 1st rounders in each draft make more than the MLE, equivalent to the average vet salary? None of them do. Not a one. Not even the first overall pick in the draft. Now, how many of them outperform the average vet? Not only that, but only the first two years are guaranteed for the player, so that even if the player is underperforming, which for the 20th pick means eating up somewhere around 1/45th of the cap on a 15 man roster, you're totally without obligation after two years. Meanwhile, as El Dude pointed out, Chris Paul is under contract for another year at 4.5 mil, still well below the MLE level, and he won't be able to sign with the team of his choice outright after next year.

Now, the players make up for this with guaranteed long term contracts upon hitting free agency. Purportedly, it'd be easy to scout the players who play in your league and you'd make fewer mistakes than you make on college and high school players, but we can see that teams still flood the league with mistakes. If a rookie isn't good enough to be in the league, he can be gone after two seasons, and a team could just as easily eat the relatively measly remaining chunk of his salary. If Jerome James isn't good enough to be in the league, on the other hand...

[ReasonablySober]

A few weeks ago Billy Packer was on ESPN radio and I thought he had a great idea. I went back and looked up the podcast so I could hear it again and get the details right.

Here's the gist of it.

- thinks David Stern wanted to weaken the college game by nabbing the high school kids, thus taking away the college 'Star System'. It was about TV ratings and advertiser dollars. Who would want to watch a league without star power. It didn't happen because CBS went into the long, ten to twelve year deal with the NCAA.

- Stern has realized that it has weekend basketball at the highest levels because you have players on NBA benches that aren't helping their teams win every night. The players think they're ready to play, but they have no opportunity or ability to do so. Meanwhile they're taking the spot of an NBA vet (why the Players Association has allowed this is a mystery) and the public is being asked to pay to see a guy who can't yet contribute.

- thinks the NBA should identify kids as early as possible, junior high even, as likely draft picks. At that point the kid should be put in a special category. He should be insured by the NCAA and the NBA. He should be properly represented. He should be allowed to play in the NBA if a team feels he could help them win. If he doesn't fall into that category he should have to go to college (or another league) and play until he's ready for the the NBA.

- he isn't opposed to the LeBrons or Lew Alcindors or the real special players that come along once every five or six years making the jump. But he cited Eric Gordon as a guy who can't even help Indiana win a game, how can he help an NBA team. Mentioned DeAndre Jordan and that despite putting up stinkers at A&M, he could be taken fifteen spots ahead of a guy like Hansbrough, and it's all based upon potential. Doesn't like that a guy can get a guaranteed contract based upon potential. Wants to see them go to school, get playing time and learn the game before entering the L.

Obviously there are some big issues with his idea. It's radical, but I like the basic premise, that the NBA determines the readiness of a prospect and puts him into a select category which allows him to be insured and represented. Guys play in college or Europe until they're ready to make a dent in the NBA. Yes, it screws the Robert Swifts, DeAndre Jordans or Martell Websters of the world. But it also leaves open the possibility for the really premier prospects to make the leap and it allows these guys to get insurance while they stick in out in the NCAA.

[emunney]

What is with this belief that Martell Webster doesn't belong in the NBA? He's starting on a .500 team at age 21.

[ReasonablySober]

What is with this belief that Martell Webster doesn't belong in the NBA? He's starting on a .500 team at age 21.

He's the lesser of two evils. Either they start him, or they start another straight from HS kid in Outlaw, neither of whom are good basketball players. Right now Webster is a 6'7" Steve Kerr. Why? Because he hasn't developed any other aspect of his game.

[zizek]

-= original quote snipped =-



He's the lesser of two evils. Either they start him, or they start another straight from HS kid in Outlaw, neither of whom are good basketball players. Right now Webster is a 6'7" Steve Kerr. Why? Because he hasn't developed any other aspect of his game.

He is playing close to 30 minutes a game over an 82 game season. He has every opportunity to develop other aspects of his game. Steve Kerr became a role player after a long college career because that's all he was capable of. If Webster is a role player after the opportunities he has been given it is because that is what he is.

[El Duderino]

-= original quote snipped =-



He's the lesser of two evils. Either they start him, or they start another straight from HS kid in Outlaw, neither of whom are good basketball players. Right now Webster is a 6'7" Steve Kerr. Why? Because he hasn't developed any other aspect of his game.

Maybe Webster just isn't that good of a player. Same with a guy like Gerald Green, just because he can jump out of the gym, that doesn't mean that if only he had gone to college that Green would have went to the NBA and been a star. Green just as easily could have gone to college and been exposed and never end up even being drafted or only say be a second round pick.

[emunney]

Or he could have gone to college for a year, used his ridiculous athleticism to play really well there, still gotten picked in the first round and still busted.