The 20 Year Old Age Limit

arenas809 · Post #1 » by **arenas809** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 1:42 pm

NBA commissioner David Stern and NCAA president Myles Brand are expected to make an announcement on Monday afternoon in San Antonio that they have reached an agreement that would make certain that players are in college for at least two years before leaving early for the NBA. According to sources, the proposal would still need to be passed through the NBA Players Association.

This is hot garbage.

FGump · Post #2 » by **FGump** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 6:34 pm

I think this is overplayed and misreported.

Stern has been mouthing for a month or so that the minimum age rule needs to be raised by a year (and he's probably right).

But the age limit can't be changed between CBAs without Players' Union approval.

So I'd wager, on the NCAA Finals stage, Stern takes the opportunity to lobby for change and says "We'd like to see the rule changed to 20 to make the college game better blah blah blah" and Brand says "We'd like it too" - and life goes on with nothing changed.

arenas809 · Post #3 » by **arenas809** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:44 pm

FGump wrote:Stern has been mouthing for a month or so that the minimum age rule needs to be raised by a year (and he's probably right).

I'm interested why you think "he's probably right".

This proposal has much more to do about money than it does basketball, always has, because if it were about basketball, they'd still let kids come into the league after high school.

FGump · Post #4 » by **FGump** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 8:04 pm

It has to do with putting a better product on the floor, and it has to do with teams finding a better way to get their money's worth from their 15-man roster (helping avoid some of the drafting less-than-ready players).

The idea that the big league rosters should be littered with kids unready to play the game is nuts. There's only 15 slots as it is. The draft is such a crapshoot anyhow, that many are drafted just to control the rights to a kid who might turn out to be pretty good but that everyone knows very well is several years away from doing a thing in the NBA.

Adding another year of mandatory preparation (in whatever venue the kid wants) before "NBA entry" is the way you keep from littering the rosters with the Not-ready-for-NBA Players. And while it slows the entry of the next Kobe or Lebron, it gives them a chance to build a bit more anticipation and fame to bring with them - if they have the skills. And if not, the NBA roster slots are more likely to go to the players not the pretenders, with another year of pre-NBA exposure mandated.

arenas809 · Post #5 » by **arenas809** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 11:28 pm

I don't agree with any of your points, and there's never been a legitimate argument substantiated by facts to suggest or conclude that allowing high school players into the league has in some way hurt the product.

There are young guys, 4 year college scrubs, and 8-10 year vets, sitting on benches that are scrubs, scrubdom knows no age.

Let's take a look at all the high school players that have been drafted since 2000.

2000
Darius Miles - it looks like his career is over, and he wasn't worth his draft position, but 2000 was a terrible draft year, so someone had to get picked, still had a decent career while it lasted.

DeShawn Stevenson - took some time, but his found his niche, is a good defender, and has some offensive game, at least now he's stop hitting just on the line 2s, and is now knocking down 3s.

2001
Kwame Brown - nothing but a bust, but he's the best trade asset in the history of the league

Tyson Chandler - another guy that took some time, but is now one of the best centers in the league, a warrior on the offensive glass

Eddy Curry - a waste of talent

DeSagana Diop - not worth his draft position, but a contributor in the league in the right role

2002
Amare Stoudemire - franchise player, perennial all-star, should be an MVP candidate

2003
Lebron James - perennial MVP candidate, future Hall of Famer

Travis Outlaw - project turned basketball player, now a legit contributor at 23

Ndubi Ebi - clearly just wasn't that good, out of the league

James Lang - fat scrub, out of the league

2004
Dwight Howard - on his way to becoming one of the most dominant players ever to play the game

Shaun Livingston - has shown flashes of greatness and production, but also injury prone, thank God he got hurt in Staples Center and not Cameron Indoor

Robert Swift - showed some signs early, now has gotten too big, and is married to the injured list

Sebastian Telfair - career started rough, but he's shown he's a legit NBA player, still only 22 years old

Al Jefferson - franchise player, this isn't his last 20-10 season, he's 22

Josh Smith - has produced his entire career, fills the stat sheet, a rare two-way player with off the charts athleticism, should be a star already, has to share spotlight, 22

J.R. Smith - obvious NBA talent, and can go off for 30 any night of the week, but is also lazy and is getting by solely on talent at this point of his career, he can be great, but he's more likely to never be as good as his potential suggested

Dorell Wright - has been poorly developed, smooth offensive game coming into the league, now is more like a garbage player, can fill the statsheets on some nights

2005
Martell Webster - Already a solid player contributing for an upcoming team in the West, just turned 21 in December.

Andrew Bynum - really broke out before the injury, on his way to being a franchise big man, and he just turned 20 a few months ago.

Gerald Green - complete bust, has spent more time working on dunk contests than his game

C.J. Miles - hasn't shown much, just dropped 29 last week, his career high

Ricky Sanchez - hasn't made a dime in the NBA yet

Monta Ellis - what a player, he's about to become the Warriors franchise player this summer

Louis Williams - another guy that it took a little time, but he's instaoffense off the bench, already, has contributed to the Sixers success this year, another kid that just turned 21.

Andray Blatche - a knucklehead with a lot of talent, has already shown he can produce in this league, has a bright future ahead of him if he continues to work

Amir Johnson - still a work in progress

The Final Results
Of the 28 players listed above...

24:of those players listed above are still in the league
3: are all-stars
5:can be classifed as borderline stars/near future all-stars
8: can be considered regular contributors

Can we agree there's a success rate of at least 67%?

This is the hard facts I'm talking about, everyone who makes arguments like yours do a lot more telling than showing, the facts don't support that letting high school players into the league waters down the competition.

Furthermore, the facts don't say that IF these kids had gone to college they'd be better players today FOR the NBA, hell a lot of these kids are the equivalents of college seniors.

Call a spade a spade.

Stern represents the owners, the more time they can buy before having to deal with these talents is just more time they DON'T have to pay them the big bucks, and over the terms of the careers it decreases their earnings potential.

There's a big difference from coming into the league at 18, getting your 2nd contract at 22, an extension possibly at 26, or worst case re-signed at 27-28 to another 4-5 year deal for big bucks because you're at the begining of your prime, versus not seeing your first big payday until your mid 20s.

Myles Brand, I don't even need to start on him, it's obvious what benefits him.

This is about money, to paint it as anything else, is being disingenuous to the whole issue.

FGump · Post #6 » by **FGump** » Tue Apr 8, 2008 2:12 am

Your numbers tell us nothing. The point Stern makes (and I agree with) is that by lopping off the 19-year-old year and letting the players do that elsewhere, the league will (a) not be paying for as many worthless junk years by unready players, and (b) will have an added year to get a feel for a player's real ability.

Nothing in that equation says those players can't be in the NBA later. But they'll be closer to NBA-ready when they arrive, with more experience and more maturity.

And when you say, "It's about money," on some level you're right because the NBA is a for-profit organization. But so what? If this is the way for them to reduce unnecessary waste, provide a better product to their fans, and thereby make more money, there's nothing insidious about any of that in the least.

DanTown8587 · Post #7 » by **DanTown8587** » Tue Apr 8, 2008 6:51 am

This has NOTHING to do with the NBA thinking that guys are not talented enough, but rather this is an image thing. The NBA is always concerned about the image they give off and by telling young, adult males to go to school for two years they gain a better image from the regular fan. And second, most of the guys in the league after HS have NO IDEA how to run their life and going to college for two years can teach them that.

Overall, I have no problem with this age rule. I mean do people get upset when a company won't hire you without a college degree? No, but the NBA, a For-profit company mind you, is either racist or unfair to make 18 year olds go to college for two years and no one seems to care that the NFL has a three year rule.

arenas809 · Post #8 » by **arenas809** » Tue Apr 8, 2008 9:29 am

FGump wrote:Your numbers tell us nothing. The point Stern makes (and I agree with) is that by lopping off the 19-year-old year and letting the players do that elsewhere, the league will (a) not be paying for as many worthless junk years by unready players, and (b) will have an added year to get a feel for a player's real ability.

My argument more than clearly dispels your notion that letting high school players in the league waters down the competition.

The idea that more time playing in college makes players more "ready" for the league is ridiculous, because again, no one's ever substantiated that argument with hard facts, until you, someone, presents some hard evidence, you're asking us to just take your word for it.

Michael McCann wrote a great paper a few years ago about this issue, you should check it out.

To the poster above, I wouldn't compare the NFL to the NBA, there's a physical aspect to the NFL that can't be compared to the one of the NBA.

FGump · Post #9 » by **FGump** » Tue Apr 8, 2008 1:33 pm

You still didn't counter my arguments, because you can't. Apparently they went over your head. But they are still 100% accurate.

First, there is no way to put a player in a test tube and run their career both ways, to calculate the difference to the career and the NBA to be allowed to play in the NBA at 19. So when you say there needs to be "hard proof" you are blindly asking for the impossible.

Second, this is not about college play alone. With this added rule, the player would be free to play wherever he wants to at the age of 19, to prepare for the NBA. If college suits him, go for it. Or try the NBADL, or Europe, or the CBA, or wherever. But think of it as an internship for being a doctor - and you have to get two intern years somewhere, before you can be hired, to get added experience and to prove yourself. You can say, "Joe is a brilliant doctor" the moment he steps out of med school, and that may be true for some, but they still must intern first, regardless. For a job with multi-millions per year guaranteed, the NBA says, "We want a 2-year intern requirement before we hire you" and if they think that makes better players, they should do so.

Third, you blew right past the maturity issue. To say a 19-yr-old is as mature as a 20-yr-old, is just dumb. Regardless of how mature any singular individual is at 18, they are moreso at 19, and moreso again at 20. That's just a fact of life. And it's the NBA's right to say, "We prefer not to allow entry into our organization until another year is added onto your life calendar."

Fourth, you say "The idea that more time playing in college makes players more "ready" for the league is ridiculous" and you can call it ridiculous, but it is easy to see that a year of added preparation is going to help the player, and added exposure is going to help the scouts evaluate him better. Will a year of preparation in the NBA be better than elsewhere? Perhaps so, but if the NBA doesn't want to pay the bill for that "age of 19" preparation and use up its team openings in the process, they have every right to proceed in that fashion.

casey · Post #10 » by **casey** » Wed Apr 9, 2008 1:39 am

arenas809 wrote:There's a big difference from coming into the league at 18, getting your 2nd contract at 22, an extension possibly at 26, or worst case re-signed at 27-28 to another 4-5 year deal for big bucks because you're at the begining of your prime, versus not seeing your first big payday until your mid 20s.

No, there's not a big difference. There's exactly a 1 year difference. And I think that's a huge stretch to say that's the reason.

In fact I don't think it really makes a difference. Maybe each player that would've came out as a freshmen will now play one less season. That's not a huge amount of players to begin with. And it's not like they're gonna lose a year in their prime. They'll still get all those big money years. Big deal? I don't think so.

arenas809 · Post #11 » by **arenas809** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:41 am

You'd be happy spending a year playing in college and not getting paid for it , instead of making a guaranteed million dollars or more? I guess we'll have to take your word for it.

For some kids, that money is not an issue, that was the case for Joakim Noah, and now Stephen Curry, but those kids are exceptions not rules.

These limits effect kids who are more often than not minorities from underprivileged backgrounds.

You can provide for yourself and your family in the NBA, you can not do that from a college campus.

You also ignore that injury is a possibility to these kids during their time playing in college.

How many top prospects have suffered injuries in the past two seasons?

Oden, Eric Gordon, Jerryd Bayless, anyone else?

I see why Mayo coasted this year, he was playing not to get hurt.

Cuban blogs about this issue and says the limit should be 22, which is incredibly stupid and laughable.

For this guy to come public about something like this when he has a franchise player that came into the league at 19 is just wow, and most of his "points" are beyond asinine.

The NBA has made a ton of money off players who have come into the league well before their 22nd birthdays, so this is ridiculous just from a business standpoint.

http://www.blogmaverick.com/2008/04/09/ ... age-limit/

FGump · Post #12 » by **FGump** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 4:34 pm

The NBA's position makes perfect sense. Yours doesn't.

No one in the NBA is saying they don't want the Kobe's and Dirk's in the NBA, only that they should wait a bit longer and have more preparation and exposure before the NBA invests millions in them. There's nothing unreasonable about that. For the owners, that will reduce WASTED expenditures and will help provide more mature/better players in the entry draft pool.

Keep in mind that with the way the NBA cap works, the owners are likely to still spend just as much on their rosters either way, meaning "the players" (as a whole) won't lose a thing. However, by erasing the whole pool of 19-year-olds from the rosters, that same pool of money is more likely to be used on a better caliber of player playing a better quality of basketball, and with more maturity too.

For the fans, that means their team will have better-prepared players being drafted, which means they get to see a better product on the floor when those drafted players get playing time.

As for the players, do they want the multi-millions the first instant they can get their hands on it? Sure. Instant gratification is a human flaw. But there is nothing inherently unfair in telling them "wait" or in demanding better preparation or maturity before getting that pot of gold. And I don't believe Mayo coasted through his college internship, but if a player does spend two years coasting and wastes his preparation years, his resulting reduced value only hurts him (and rightly so).

arenas809 · Post #13 » by **arenas809** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:41 pm

Ya the NBA's position makes total sense.

[/sarcasm]

I didn't notice this article on the site until 5 minutes ago...

http://realgm.com/src_feature_article/1 ... ot_enough/

It's nice to see when someone makes an argument and backs it up with actual evidence, as opposed to just expecting readers to believe what they're saying solely because they're saying it.

FGump · Post #14 » by **Three34** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:00 pm

The article has a point, but the evidence isn't too solid, working both for and against the crux of the argument. Ebi, Smith and Lang did make the NBA, albeit to varying degrees in varying ways. But they've all taken to the court in an NBA game.

They didn't stick around, but they did get there.

Also, this bit doesn't make a lot of sense:

Of the 41 players drafted out of high school, only 10 of those failed to make the NBA: Taj McDavid, Korleone Young, Ellis Richardson, Leon Smith, Ousmane Cisse, Tony Key, DeAngelo Collins, Lenny Cooke, Ndudi Ebbi, and James Lang.

McDavid, Richardson, Key, Collins, and Cooke weren