D League Development?

[CoachD]

Reading about Rice being sent down, and discussions of Otto possibly going - it leads me to a conversation I've had with colleagues many times over the last few years...

What the hell is going on in the D League?

The DEVELOPMENT league isn't actually developing anyone.

It was founded in 2001. Since that time, how many raw prospects have gone down and come back better?

Matt Carroll comes to mind, but everyone knew that kid would get a shot based on his ... shot.

Amir Johnson spent time there as a Detroit Piston, but Amir didn't develop until he was traded twice and ended up with Toronto.

Marcin Gortat has improved on the offensive end since he went down, but certainly his improvement shared no correlation to his time in the D League.

How is the NBADL not hiring GREAT teachers to really develop these kids? Why do they give a rat's ass about wins and losses?

I know the NBDL isn't a true farm system, but no other "minor league program" has this terrible a reputation over the past decade plus.

[verbal8]

DLeague isn't about developing future NBA stars. There is the NCAA "farm system" for that. It is about giving the bottom of the rotation/end-of-the bench NBA players game experience. That is how the top teams use it, so they don't have to burn 2nd rounders to acquire a role player.

[CoachD]

While I respect that opinion, I don't fully agree with it.

A) Many teams have sent lottery picks / first rounders who they had high hopes for to the D League to get more reps. I personally think Rice Jr and Porter are pretty decent prospects. Sending one or both to the D League essentially doesn't give them anything except less time with a pro coaching staff.

B) The NCAA is much further from being a farm system, since the players don't yet belong to any clubs that can monitor and assist with their development.

C) If the D League is all about making your 15th man into your 12th man, then isn't this a huge colossal waste of money?

I'm not saying that since 2001, a former D Leaguer should have made the NBA all star game ... but there should be more than a couple who are a key part of a winning team's rotation.

[pancakes3]

I don't really believe much in the mystical developmental powers of the D-league. If you're not big enough, fast enough, or tall enough, then you better have a highly developed NBA skill (rebounding or shooting). The d-league does much to engender any of those attributes. If you need the d-league to teach you how to rebound or shot (Jan Vesely) then your ceiling is pretty low. The best you can hope for is that a guy is overlooked in the draft and summer league and gets bused down to the d-leauge STILL has a chance to prove themselves but even those guys only end up being 10-day guys. Then it gets down to financial reasons. You'd much rather sign a rookie min than a vet min.

[CoachD]

I don't really believe much in the mystical developmental powers of the D-league. If you're not big enough, fast enough, or tall enough, then you better have a highly developed NBA skill (rebounding or shooting). The d-league does much to engender any of those attributes. If you need the d-league to teach you how to rebound or shot (Jan Vesely) then your ceiling is pretty low. The best you can hope for is that a guy is overlooked in the draft and summer league and gets bused down to the d-leauge STILL has a chance to prove themselves but even those guys only end up being 10-day guys. Then it gets down to financial reasons. You'd much rather sign a rookie min than a vet min.

But players DO get better in those areas you mentioned at the NBA level.

- When LeBron came into the NBA he couldn't shoot from outside - that was his big knock.
- Noah was considered to not be strong enough to rebound effectively against real 5s.
- Terrence Ross was thought to have too short a wingspan to be an effective defender.

Guys DO get better in the NBA - but not in the league that's designed to make guys better

[Nivek]

While I respect that opinion, I don't fully agree with it.

A) Many teams have sent lottery picks / first rounders who they had high hopes for to the D League to get more reps. I personally think Rice Jr and Porter are pretty decent prospects. Sending one or both to the D League essentially doesn't give them anything except less time with a pro coaching staff.

Check out what the Rockets are doing with their D League team. They've implemented the same offensive and defensive systems as they're using with their NBA team. As much as possible, they're replicating at the D League level what they're doing with the "big" team -- same approach to practices, conditioning, points of emphasis from the coaches, video review, scouting reports, etc. They've taken pains to make sure their terminology is consistent as well.

When I wrote an article about player development a few years ago, several NBA execs talked about the need to remove the stigma of being "sent down." Many players feel humiliated being sent to the D League -- they view it as a failure.

Virtually every exec and coach I interviewed thought teams should be able to use the D League for injury rehab, like MLB does. In this model, Nenê would be able to play 4-5 games at the D League level when coming back from his knee injury before returning to the NBA. I like this idea.

B) The NCAA is much further from being a farm system, since the players don't yet belong to any clubs that can monitor and assist with their development.

Very true. Plus, the coaching isn't as good, the competition is FAR inferior, and there are time restrictions. Mark Cuban has said that he'd prefer to get a kid straight from high school rather than having him spend a year in college because at the NBA level they don't have the same time restrictions. For a guy who isn't playing much -- who's in development -- the team can make demands on his time that cannot be made when a kid is in school. They're paying him to develop, and they can guide the player's workouts to what the NBA team thinks is most important. Makes sense to me.

C) If the D League is all about making your 15th man into your 12th man, then isn't this a huge colossal waste of money?

I'm not saying that since 2001, a former D Leaguer should have made the NBA all star game ... but there should be more than a couple who are a key part of a winning team's rotation.

I dunno. The NBA is a tough, competitive league. To casual fans, it looks like guys aren't playing hard (for example) but that's because the players are so good and they're such phenomenal athletes.

Plus, the NBA is sometimes...slow...to innovate. If the Rockets start having success with their approach to the D League (and they already are), other teams will copy them.

[pancakes3]

I don't really believe much in the mystical developmental powers of the D-league. If you're not big enough, fast enough, or tall enough, then you better have a highly developed NBA skill (rebounding or shooting). The d-league does much to engender any of those attributes. If you need the d-league to teach you how to rebound or shot (Jan Vesely) then your ceiling is pretty low. The best you can hope for is that a guy is overlooked in the draft and summer league and gets bused down to the d-leauge STILL has a chance to prove themselves but even those guys only end up being 10-day guys. Then it gets down to financial reasons. You'd much rather sign a rookie min than a vet min.

But players DO get better in those areas you mentioned at the NBA level.

- When LeBron came into the NBA he couldn't shoot from outside - that was his big knock.
- Noah was considered to not be strong enough to rebound effectively against real 5s.
- Terrence Ross was thought to have too short a wingspan to be an effective defender.

Guys DO get better in the NBA - but not in the league that's designed to make guys better

1) If players do improve, their physical, immutable deficiencies hold them back. You or I could spend a lifetime in the d-league and never make it in the NBA.
2) If players improve it'll still take years. It's preferrable to take a flier on a rookie than someone who's spent 2-3 seasons grinding it out in the d-league.
3) The Noah and Ross examples were of guys that were "perceived" as incapable. Not actually incapable. Deandre Jordan would be a better example of someone who "learned" how to rebound. Even then, it's not so much he learned to rebound more but to foul less.

Furthermore, the catch-22 is that someone like DJ would never be sent to the d-league. As bad as he was (on a per-minute basis, not that bad) at rebounding, he still has intrinsic value as 7 footer. The d-league would be for a 6'9 version of DJ and that guy can learn to rebound as much as he wants, he won't bring as much value as a non-rebounding Jordan (or so the theory goes).

Put it this way, would you rather have Deandre Jordan or Jarvis Varnado?

[cwb3]

So for marginal or uncertain NBA prospects is it better to:

A) Leave college early for draft and wind up playing D-League
or
B) Staying in a Div 1 college program for 2, 3, or 4 years?

[Rafael122]

I agree w/Nivek. Ted needs to buy a team and move it to Fairfax, and have a system where it replicates what the pro team is doing. The problem with that is that we need consistency in the management department, and the Wizards don't have that. They fired Flip, Wittman is probably gone. Need to have a strong pro program.

[Ruzious]

One thing San Antonio did was have one of their D League players develop a 3 point shot so he could be a face 4. The coaches there worked with him, and he improved enough that SA brought him up for a few games. It may not end up working out with that player, but ya keep working at situations like that and eventually it pays off.

[keynote]

As a fan, it seems like every NBA team would want their own exclusive D-league affiliate, so that they could implement some (if not all) of the techniques employed by the Rockets. Yeah, there's an economic cost, presumably, but D-League teams do generate some revenue, no? Obviously, MLB teams have figured out how to keep their minor league system from becoming a money pit. But even if it *does* cost money: shouldn't that be chalked up to the cost of doing business? Part of the overhead of managing a competitive NBA team is having state-of-the-art practice facilities, a scouting staff -- and a D-League affiliate.

So, I wonder if there are other, strategic reasons for Ted and a handful of other NBA owners have not bothered to establish or buy their own D-League affiliates. Is this purely a cost-saving measure, or is there something else? E.g., are teams worried that operating a D-League team that uses their sets, vocabulary, etc., would provide other teams with more opportunities to scout them? NBA teams that own their D-League affiliates don't own the rights to all of the *players* on that affiliate. So, a rival team could call up a Rockets D-Leaguer for a 10-day -- or just a workout -- just to pick his brain about the Rockets' schemes.

I know it's a stretch. But I'm curious as to whether there are any legitimate *basketball* reasons for not ponying up for a D-league team.

[Nivek]

keynote: From the interviews I did a a couple years ago, the issue for teams not having their own D-League teams was value/money. In other words, they didn't think the value they would get would be worth the costs of supporting the team.

[pancakes3]

I think the Hampton Roads (Norfolk/Va Beach/etc) is a prime candidate for a d-league team. There's 1.7 million people in the metro area (Sacto has 1.9, Charlotte 2.3, San Antonio 2.2, Milwaukee 2.0) and only a minor league baseball and minor league hockey team to show for it.

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

keynote: From the interviews I did a a couple years ago, the issue for teams not having their own D-League teams was value/money. In other words, they didn't think the value they would get would be worth the costs of supporting the team.

And, although it is a stretch to say Ted doesn't care about winning, it isn't at all a stretch to surmise (based on consistent themes in his Ted's Takes) that he doesn't care about winning quite as much as many, if not most, NBA owners.

He sees himself as being in the entertainment business... and basketball (and hockey) is relatively low cost content, like reality TV.

The producers of Survivor don't send their competitors to training camp to improve the quality of their performance. Its consumers like the show just about as well as is vs. how they might like it if "Chantel" did a better job in one of the show's challenges.

[nate33]

I think fans would have much more interest in watching and following D-League games if they perceived of it as a farm team for their pro franchise. The D-League isn't profitable now because teams have such an indirect link to their sponsoring NBA team.

[verbal8]

I think fans would have much more interest in watching and following D-League games if they perceived of it as a farm team for their pro franchise. The D-League isn't profitable now because teams have such an indirect link to their sponsoring NBA team.

I think D-League will need a subsidy to stay in business, but I think there is definitely a possibility of being closer to break even.

The whole salary for D-league team is 172K.

http://www.ridiculousupside.com%2F2014% ... -increased

So if EG is making 5 million, one year of his salary would pay for 30 years of payroll for a D-League team. I realize that travel/lodging costs are probably a lot more than the player salaries.

[TGW]

I think fans would have much more interest in watching and following D-League games if they perceived of it as a farm team for their pro franchise. The D-League isn't profitable now because teams have such an indirect link to their sponsoring NBA team.

Exactly Nate. If they modeled the d-league after MLB's minor league, it would be much more profitable and meaningful, and it wouldn't be such a kick in the balls psychologically if a player got sent down. Basically what Kevin wrote.

[dckingsfan]

This is such a "duh"... violent agreement. Then you could have 3 or 4 rounds in the draft. Each club would have a D club with the rights of those players belonging to the primary club for some amount of time.

They could experiment with the refs and ref'ing methodologies and have ref development as well. And that goes for the coaches too.

Players union might disagree at first but in the end, probably not so much. Take 1.5M or so from the base and distribute it to the players salaries in the D league.

[hands11]

I think fans would have much more interest in watching and following D-League games if they perceived of it as a farm team for their pro franchise. The D-League isn't profitable now because teams have such an indirect link to their sponsoring NBA team.

Exactly. I posted this in another thread but I heard a DL exec interview AS weekend.

Over the next 3-5 year there will be a 1 for 1 connection to NBA teams.

And the DL will continue to be used to try out new rules before implemented in the NBA.

It not a matter of if we will have one. Just went. And I expect the went to happen once we stop spending 13M of dead money on players that don't play here.

In 2-3 years there will be a Wiz DL team.

[closg00]

So the Knicks are purchasing their own D-League team and cutting their ties to their single affiliation team. Someone will need to explain to me what the difference is between single affiliation, and owning your own team out right.

14 of the 17 D-League teams are single affiliation teams (NBA franchise controlled). The Wizards are one of the 3 teams that do not a single affiliate.