RealGM

I'm sick and tired of having guys leave for the NBA when they clearly aren't ready. I might be a bit biased, but I also enjoy college ball and I think college would benefit from having more talented sophomores instead of the sophomores who were basically horrible as freshmen or (rarely) decide to turn down the NBA the first time around.

Guys like Deyonta Davis, Brandon Ingram, Noah Vonley (few years back) and dozens and dozens of other players shouldn't even be in the NBA with their poor physical build and little development during their first year. They've basically been drafted to the NBA based on potential and reputation.

Look at a guy like Harry Giles for example. Dude barely played any minutes for Duke yesterday but he'll go top 10 in the draft and who knows how he'll end up.

For me, you have to at least prove you belong in the NBA. And heck, you definitely have to prove you're a lottery pick.

Outside superstars like LeBron, Melo, Durant, Davis, etc....how many freshman actually make an impact during their first year in the NBA? Not many. It even took Wiggins a bit of time.

I'm generally against forcing people to do something they don't want to do, if the kid wants to go straight for the NBA nobody forces anyone to draft him.

Yeah you could argue the 1-and-done rule was only implemented to generate revenue for the NCAA

Actually that's not even a real argument IMO, that's exactly why these guys have to go to college for a year

Guys like Draymond Green and Damian Lillard are great examples. Even Steph Curry.

None of those guys would be who they are if they didn't develop in College.

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:Guys like Draymond Green and Damian Lillard are great examples. Even Steph Curry.

None of those guys would be who they are if they didn't develop in College.

Guys like LeBron James and Amare Stoudemire are great examples. Even Moses Malone. None of those guys needed college.

Absolutely not. IMO, they should change it and allow people to enter the draft once they turn 18.

I've kinda been in favor of a 0 or 2+ rule. If a guy thinks he's good enough to go right out of high school, have that opportunity there. But if he's not sure then give him two years in the NCAA to develop and at least get somewhat close to an associates in case he blows out his knee or just isn't good enough to cut it. Teams in the NBA would have more of an idea of what they're investing in in those 2+ (to specify I mean anywhere 2 or more years in the NCAA) while also still having the opportunity to gamble on a straight out of high school player if they thought he was worth it.

Black Jack wrote:

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:Guys like Draymond Green and Damian Lillard are great examples. Even Steph Curry.

None of those guys would be who they are if they didn't develop in College.

Guys like LeBron James and Amare Stoudemire are great examples. Even Moses Malone. None of those guys needed college.

LeBron is a freak of nature. Of course he didn't need college.

Stoudamire's bad knees could be due to not enough exposure to such a high level of basketball at a young age. College could've helped him.

There's no need to help the NCAA rip off even more athletes. I wish more athletes went to Europe over playing with the NCAA.

You don't get an associate degree at a 4 year university....

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:I'm sick and tired of having guys leave for the NBA when they clearly aren't ready. I might be a bit biased, but I also enjoy college ball and I think college would benefit from having more talented sophomores instead of the sophomores who were basically horrible as freshmen or (rarely) decide to turn down the NBA the first time around.

Guys like Deyonta Davis, Brandon Ingram, Noah Vonley (few years back) and dozens and dozens of other players shouldn't even be in the NBA with their poor physical build and little development during their first year. They've basically been drafted to the NBA based on potential and reputation.

Look at a guy like Harry Giles for example. Dude barely played any minutes for Duke yesterday but he'll go top 10 in the draft and who knows how he'll end up.

For me, you have to at least prove you belong in the NBA. And heck, you definitely have to prove you're a lottery pick.

Outside superstars like LeBron, Melo, Durant, Davis, etc....how many freshman actually make an impact during their first year in the NBA? Not many. It even took Wiggins a bit of time.

Ingram will be more NBA ready next year than if he spent this past year in college. Nobody better to learn from than actual NBA players and coaches.

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:

Black Jack wrote:

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:Guys like Draymond Green and Damian Lillard are great examples. Even Steph Curry.

None of those guys would be who they are if they didn't develop in College.

Guys like LeBron James and Amare Stoudemire are great examples. Even Moses Malone. None of those guys needed college.

LeBron is a freak of nature. Of course he didn't need college.

Stoudamire's bad knees could be due to not enough exposure to such a high level of basketball at a young age. College could've helped him.

So would you allow an exception to all freaks of nature?

Kobe wasn't a freak of nature and he didn't need college.

LameR wrote:I've kinda been in favor of a 0 or 2+ rule. If a guy thinks he's good enough to go right out of high school, have that opportunity there. But if he's not sure then give him two years in the NCAA to develop and at least get somewhat close to an associates in case he blows out his knee or just isn't good enough to cut it. Teams in the NBA would have more of an idea of what they're investing in in those 2+ (to specify I mean anywhere 2 or more years in the NCAA) while also still having the opportunity to gamble on a straight out of high school player if they thought he was worth it.

I agree. The college route should be a two-year commitment at least, as with a contract (even though they're "not employees"). The college route should also not be the only route.

It's kind of crazy to think that if LeBron played 10 years later, he would have been forced to play college basketball.

I wonder if some kind of arrangement could be worked out where college basketball is the farm system of sorts. Teams can draft the rights to the one and done player, and keep him on his college team until they're ready for him.

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:

Black Jack wrote:

Tiesto_Lakers wrote:Guys like Draymond Green and Damian Lillard are great examples. Even Steph Curry.

None of those guys would be who they are if they didn't develop in College.

Guys like LeBron James and Amare Stoudemire are great examples. Even Moses Malone. None of those guys needed college.

LeBron is a freak of nature. Of course he didn't need college.

Stoudamire's bad knees could be due to not enough exposure to such a high level of basketball at a young age. College could've helped him.

Amare got majorly paid, he's still youngish, rich, with a good life. Totally paternalistic and stupid to say he should have been forced to go to college when he had a marketable skill that made him rich.

If some 6 year old can get a paycheck for acting then an 18 year old can get one for hoops.

I hate to go racial but if basketball was dominated by white guys I really really doubt this would be a question.

Maybe just only allow 0 and 1 year college players drafted in the lotto or some cutoff. Basically, if you make the decision to leap before you are ready, and some team is dumb enough to take you in the lotto - their loss and you are due about 10 million so you can obably afford to "miss your education".

Maybe the cutoff should be only top 3 or top 5. The desire is to let your lebrons and garnetts through but not your dorell wrights

The NCAA cabal already is exploiting athletes enough, no reason to allow them to extract more undeserved revenue from them

Would love if they did that. And it would help parity. Not taking as many risks at the draft with more info to draft by.

No, nobody is forcing these GMs to take these kids.

Ripp wrote:The NCAA cabal already is exploiting athletes enough, no reason to allow them to extract more undeserved revenue from them

See, I dont think it does. You make the rule that if you go to college, you will not be eligible to be drafted until after your sophomore year. This still allows players to go to the D-League, Europe, or straight out of highschool. To me, this will make the D-League far more interesting, allow generational talents to leave after highschool, and college basketball to be higher quality in regards to team defense, ball movement, etc.

Yes