jefe wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I understand what you're saying and it certainly has merit, but IMO rookie means rookie (i.e. first year playing in the league). But if you want to draw a bright line, why not say "rookie" means first year of playing the sport professionally (i.e. distinction from "amateur" NCAA play) regardless of league/age?
That distinction would work for me but would still cause some problems. It is the guys that have played professionally for years that come over and are judged against teenagers and young players that cause problems for me. Instituting a rookie/amateur definition would solve that issue. However, it would probably eliminate all Europeans and many other foreign players who play professionally at a very young age. Someone like Darko or Dirk would not be rookie eligible under that definition because they previously played professionally - even though they were very young when they started in the league.
It is a subject that reasonable minds would differ on. I still like a pure age limit best but maybe a hybrid rule would also work...something along the lines of making players under 24 rookie eligible per se and players over 24 rookie ineligible only if they have played professionally.