Age limit of 20 included in new proposal

[dano81]

Good news for the Bulls (who have a Charlotte pick, coming, eventually), good news for college basketball, BAD NEWS FOR INDIVIDUAL "RIGHTS"!

LeBron was physically ready to play at 16, others are not. The once in a generation talents shouldn't have to suffer.

[RalphWiggum]

You make some good points that are hard to dispute but my biggest argument has always been we are talking about adults that have a right to earn a living in their chosen field and that trumps all my other arguments.

There is nothing illegal or "un-American" about having hiring requirements, including age limits. They occur in other industries, and often exist to do nothing more than enhance the average maturity and judgment level of those who would possibly work there. If it would help the NBA provide a better product or be more efficient or profitable, it would be stupid for the NBA to NOT have higher age limits.

It's not to keep talent out - it's to raise the general marketability of the set of players being sold to the public as people to watch as they play a game.

Any industry that has hiring (especially age) requirements are generally in the public safety or service sector. These are guys playing a game, dribbling a ball, making shots and trying to stop other guys from doing the same. This is not an industry that should be putting age restrictions on it's employees.

[Wolfay]

You make some good points that are hard to dispute but my biggest argument has always been we are talking about adults that have a right to earn a living in their chosen field and that trumps all my other arguments. I've said this 5 times already but I have to repeat it, these are men who in the eyes of the US government are entitled to vote for public officials, who can go to war and die for their country and are considered emotionally and physically mature enough to go to prison but somehow an NBA team if they want shouldn't be allowed to employ them because they would be better a year or two from now? What other profession doesn't this apply to? Would Cops or Firemen not be better at their jobs if they trained a year or two more, where do we draw the line?

Would the NBA have more finished products and be taking less risks (on draft picks they don't have to make never forget that) of course they would but that's not the crux of my argument, my argument more than anything has always been that these guys have the right to become pros as long as there are teams that want to give them a pro contract. To deny them that option in my opinion is bordering on criminal if there are team owners who want to give them a job which there will always be.

Again, you're straying from my main point that the age limit has little to do with the talent and skill of the players, but how they're representing the NBA, and how the NBA is presented will have an effect on how much money the NBA is going to make. Comparing the NBA to the military is comparing apples to oranges. The military isn't trying to attract fans and sell them tickets for profit.

And to your other point that there are teams willing to give these 18 year olds contracts, well, technically there isn't (in North America anyway), otherwise the age limit wouldn't be included in the proposed CBA. Sure, there might be some teams not thrilled about it, but that's not the point. It's in the proposal. They realize in the long run that having a more mature and educated workforce will bring more fans and their wallets to the league.

[DBoys]

Any industry that has hiring (especially age) requirements are generally in the public safety or service sector. These are guys playing a game, dribbling a ball, making shots and trying to stop other guys from doing the same. This is not an industry that should be putting age restrictions on it's employees.

Disagree.

Whether it's a game or not, you are paying the entry-level employees millions, which means they need to be worth millions to your industry. The overall quality of play would be enhanced by having more developed players - and you'd be adding one more year of prior development, to everyone who enters the league. You'd also give added opportunity for those players to develop greater external fame, which would make them more marketable to the public when they enter. One-and-done barely gives time for the pubic to be intrigued with the potential.

In a profession that rewards entering players with multi-millions, guaranteed, it's stupid if they are NOT picky and demanding with their entry requirements. This is a profession that SHOULD be smart about ensuring those entering employees are as prepared as possible to immediately be able to earn back the millions they'll be getting.

[RalphWiggum]

You make some good points that are hard to dispute but my biggest argument has always been we are talking about adults that have a right to earn a living in their chosen field and that trumps all my other arguments. I've said this 5 times already but I have to repeat it, these are men who in the eyes of the US government are entitled to vote for public officials, who can go to war and die for their country and are considered emotionally and physically mature enough to go to prison but somehow an NBA team if they want shouldn't be allowed to employ them because they would be better a year or two from now? What other profession doesn't this apply to? Would Cops or Firemen not be better at their jobs if they trained a year or two more, where do we draw the line?

Would the NBA have more finished products and be taking less risks (on draft picks they don't have to make never forget that) of course they would but that's not the crux of my argument, my argument more than anything has always been that these guys have the right to become pros as long as there are teams that want to give them a pro contract. To deny them that option in my opinion is bordering on criminal if there are team owners who want to give them a job which there will always be.

Again, you're straying from my main point that the age limit has little to do with the talent and skill of the players, but how they're representing the NBA, and how the NBA is presented will have an effect on how much money the NBA is going to make. Comparing the NBA to the military is comparing apples to oranges. The military isn't trying to attract fans and sell them tickets for profit.

And to your other point that there are teams willing to give these 18 year olds contracts, well, technically there isn't (in North America anyway), otherwise the age limit wouldn't be included in the proposed CBA. Sure, there might be some teams not thrilled about it, but that's not the point. It's in the proposal. They realize in the long run that having a more mature and educated workforce will bring more fans and their wallets to the league.

Ya the military may not be trying to sell tickets per se but they sure as hell are advertising and want the general pubic to have a certain image of what they stand for and what they do.

[Wolfay]

Ya the military may not be trying to sell tickets per se but they sure as hell are advertising and want the general pubic to have a certain image of what they stand for and what they do.

Yea, and the things the military are allowed to do to gain and protect their image is what some of the players and agents thinks is akin to slavery. An insubordinate player is still going to make his millions.

[RalphWiggum]

You make some good points that are hard to dispute but my biggest argument has always been we are talking about adults that have a right to earn a living in their chosen field and that trumps all my other arguments. I've said this 5 times already but I have to repeat it, these are men who in the eyes of the US government are entitled to vote for public officials, who can go to war and die for their country and are considered emotionally and physically mature enough to go to prison but somehow an NBA team if they want shouldn't be allowed to employ them because they would be better a year or two from now? What other profession doesn't this apply to? Would Cops or Firemen not be better at their jobs if they trained a year or two more, where do we draw the line?

Would the NBA have more finished products and be taking less risks (on draft picks they don't have to make never forget that) of course they would but that's not the crux of my argument, my argument more than anything has always been that these guys have the right to become pros as long as there are teams that want to give them a pro contract. To deny them that option in my opinion is bordering on criminal if there are team owners who want to give them a job which there will always be.

Again, you're straying from my main point that the age limit has little to do with the talent and skill of the players, but how they're representing the NBA, and how the NBA is presented will have an effect on how much money the NBA is going to make. Comparing the NBA to the military is comparing apples to oranges. The military isn't trying to attract fans and sell them tickets for profit.

And to your other point that there are teams willing to give these 18 year olds contracts, well, technically there isn't (in North America anyway), otherwise the age limit wouldn't be included in the proposed CBA. Sure, there might be some teams not thrilled about it, but that's not the point. It's in the proposal. They realize in the long run that having a more mature and educated workforce will bring more fans and their wallets to the league.

Out of curiosity why would owner after owner agree to (and don't kid yourself every pick gets run by them first) draft these HS kids with early first round picks if they thought they were just hurting the over all value of their league and it's image. If that was really the case they would collude to not take these kids but the exact opposite is the reality, they snatch them up as soon as they can in most cases.

Do you really believe the public image of the NBA and it's relevance on the north american sporting landscape would be better had Lebron and Kobe played some college ball or went overseas for a season or 2 instead of just coming out as 18 year olds.

Sorry I'm not buying it and neither are these billionaire owners who own teams. They are obviously very bright business men or they would never be in a place to buy multi million dollar franchises and time after time when they have the chance to get one of these kids they are all over it like white on rice. If they thought it was a detriment to the league they wouldn't give the OK to GM's to pick these kids but they always seem to say "lets do it".

[RalphWiggum]

Ya the military may not be trying to sell tickets per se but they sure as hell are advertising and want the general pubic to have a certain image of what they stand for and what they do.

Yea, and the things the military are allowed to do to gain and protect their image is what some of the players and agents thinks is akin to slavery. An insubordinate player is still going to make his millions.

I don't even know how to respond to this or what your real point is?

HS players are slaves, they are insubordinate where as a kid who goes to college for a year will be more willing to be a team player and won't bury a franchise?

I'm confused?

[RalphWiggum]

Any industry that has hiring (especially age) requirements are generally in the public safety or service sector. These are guys playing a game, dribbling a ball, making shots and trying to stop other guys from doing the same. This is not an industry that should be putting age restrictions on it's employees.

Disagree.

Whether it's a game or not, you are paying the entry-level employees millions, which means they need to be worth millions to your industry. The overall quality of play would be enhanced by having more developed players - and you'd be adding one more year of prior development, to everyone who enters the league. You'd also give added opportunity for those players to develop greater external fame, which would make them more marketable to the public when they enter. One-and-done barely gives time for the pubic to be intrigued with the potential.

In a profession that rewards entering players with multi-millions, guaranteed, it's stupid if they are NOT picky and demanding with their entry requirements. This is a profession that SHOULD be smart about ensuring those entering employees are as prepared as possible to immediately be able to earn back the millions they'll be getting.

And again I repeat myself but nobody is forcing these teams to draft players that may not be as polished, marketable, or palatable to the public (which I think is a total myth) as a player with a little more experience through playing college or playing in europe. You can pass and draft some kid who has a few more years of playing experience that the public will salivate over (Sarcasm).

If you feel it's in the best interest of your team and or the league to not have kids like this representing your team or league then you simply don't draft them, you do that and this so called problem takes care of itself.

[DBoys]

If you feel it's in the best interest of your team and or the league to not have kids like this representing your team or league then you simply don't draft them,

Age 20 rule - agreed - done and done. League should make whatever rules make it most likely for them to max their revenue, and 20 rule will help.

[kobeaki]

im good with it...if for no other reason, then letting these guys mature a bit, some more college, as evidenced by how poor the players are at negotiations...and im pro-players...

[doctorfunk]

Dwight Howard and Emeka Okafor were the top 2 picks in 2004. One had no college experience, and the other had tons. Who was the better pick?

/facepalm
It is not about whether HS players are busts or not, this is about everyone getting +1yr of experience and skill. It is good for the skill level in the NBA, better rookies = better league.

[re49gb_2gho32fp]

Other than James, few players have a significant impact in nba at age 18.

Always been, always will be.

They have more impact than guys that are not in the NBA at all because they're stuck in college.

Come on. That argument goes for any college player that would get drafted instead of the other guy/high school kid.

Other than James, few players have a significant impact in nba at age 18.

Always been, always will be.

Dwight has had no impact.
Kobe has had no impact.
Amar'e has had no impact.
Tracy McGrady has had no impact.
Kevin Garnett has had no impact.
Tyson Chandler has had no impact.
Monta Ellis has had no impact.
Josh Smith has had no impact.
Al Jefferson has had no impact.
Andrew Bynum has had no impact.
Moses Malone had no impact.
Shawn Kemp had no impact.
Darryl Dawkins had no impact.

Feared as much. Reading comprehension with focus on a word starting with the letter "s".

Other than James, few players have a significant impact in nba at age 18.

Always been, always will be.

Dwight Howard? Amare?

See above with focus on another word that well corresponds with the number of names brought up in your post.

[re49gb_2gho32fp]

Sark wrote:
"Dwight Howard and Emeka Okafor were the top 2 picks in 2004. One had no college experience, and the other had tons. Who was the better pick?"

less about who-what-when and more about 'why'.

[Fat Kat]

Don't know if some posters are being intentionally obtuse but this is getting ridiculous. Shaolin, it's difficult for and 18year old to make an impact in the NBA if he's not allowed in the league. When they are allowed, a greater percentage of these players have an impact. Lebron and Howard have had great rookie seasons and a tremendous impact on the league. Can't be argued.

Kudos to those of you that admitted that your opinion is effected by bias in favor of explotation.

[doctorfunk]

Don't know if some posters are being intentionally obtuse but this is getting ridiculous. Shaolin, it's difficult for and 18year old to make an impact in the NBA if he's not allowed in the league. When they are allowed, a greater percentage of these players have an impact. Lebron and Howard have had great rookie seasons and a tremendous impact on the league. Can't be argued.

that's some **** up reasoning

If they won't come at 19 like now, they will come as 20y/o with EVEN GREATER IMPACT as more polished players with better skills. I fail to see what is your point here.

[princeofpalace]

The owners also proposed offseason drug testing and raising the age limit to 20 years old to enter the league, sources said.

A league official qualified both those issues and the NBDL clause as "B List" items that are still open to negotiation and not among the main points commissioner David Stern said are no longer up for discussion.

http://m.espn.go.com/nba/story?storyId=7220959&localId=chi&wjb

[Thugger HBC]

Don't know if some posters are being intentionally obtuse but this is getting ridiculous. Shaolin, it's difficult for and 18year old to make an impact in the NBA if he's not allowed in the league. When they are allowed, a greater percentage of these players have an impact. Lebron and Howard have had great rookie seasons and a tremendous impact on the league. Can't be argued.

Kudos to those of you that admitted that your opinion is effected by bias in favor of explotation.

I think his point is that they don't make the impact at the year of 18, not that they don't wind up having great careers.

Me personally, I don't like the rule, no one is forcing teams to draft the 18 year olds.

Teams should be able to decide on their own if this young man will be worth the money they are investing.

I remember reading that NYtimes article and it did raise some point of note.

I would never play the race card, but it is weird that the two sports most notably have inner circle kids from poorer families are the ones with the age limit.

I do think football should have some restriction just because of the physical nature, but the NBA....

Nah.

[Fat Kat]

Don't know if some posters are being intentionally obtuse but this is getting ridiculous. Shaolin, it's difficult for and 18year old to make an impact in the NBA if he's not allowed in the league. When they are allowed, a greater percentage of these players have an impact. Lebron and Howard have had great rookie seasons and a tremendous impact on the league. Can't be argued.

Kudos to those of you that admitted that your opinion is effected by bias in favor of explotation.

I think his point is that they don't make the impact at the year of 18, not that they don't wind up having great careers.

Me personally, I don't like the rule, no one is forcing teams to draft the 18 year olds.

Teams should be able to decide on their own if this young man will be worth the money they are investing.

I remember reading that NYtimes article and it did raise some point of note.

I would never play the race card, but it is weird that the two sports most notably have inner circle kids from poorer families are the ones with the age limit.

I do think football should have some restriction just because of the physical nature, but the NBA....

Nah.

Good to see you here Thugger. Let's say we take the last decade. Lebron and Dwight had great rookie seasons straight from HS. Why change the rule? Because they needed college coaching? Owners had to wait for them to develop? They didn't have an impact? Did Amare have an impact? Why did they change the rule, because it sure as hell had nothing to do with skill level.

I guess I'm tired of people trying to make excuses for the rule when all evidence points to corruption.

[Fat Kat]

Don't know if some posters are being intentionally obtuse but this is getting ridiculous. Shaolin, it's difficult for and 18year old to make an impact in the NBA if he's not allowed in the league. When they are allowed, a greater percentage of these players have an impact. Lebron and Howard have had great rookie seasons and a tremendous impact on the league. Can't be argued.

that's some **** up reasoning

If they won't come at 19 like now, they will come as 20y/o with EVEN GREATER IMPACT as more polished players with better skills. I fail to see what is your point here.

Who says that college makes their impact better? Is it the inferior coaching or lack of competition? Pro facilities and coaching helps some, no? I fail to see your point.
Bottom line is if your skillet dictates that you'll get playing time as a rookie, then you should have the choice to do that.