O'Neal is the poster child...

[Chaplin]

He's right it is a double standard. Baseball players are drafted out of high-school and sometimes as juniors. It's just that the NBA is a higher profile league and there is a perception that all these kids are uneducated street punks.

Although the NBA has a point. It is their league and they can make their own rules. As long as they are constitutional.

But again, drafted kids in baseball don't come directly to the pros.

 

[boisesuns]

maybe a few years in college would teach him about when the game gets out of hand.

 

[Southpaw]

He's right it is a double standard. Baseball players are drafted out of high-school and sometimes as juniors. It's just that the NBA is a higher profile league and there is a perception that all these kids are uneducated street punks.

Although the NBA has a point. It is their league and they can make their own rules. As long as they are constitutional.

Perception is earned.

 

[boisesuns]

don't most colleges offer boxing classes? And isn't college supposed to prepare you for the "real world?" sounds like a fit to me.

 

[JPlay]

But again, drafted kids in baseball don't come directly to the pros.

Who cares where they go, they still sign big contracts and don't go to college.

 

[myrondizzo]

He's right it is a double standard. Baseball players are drafted out of high-school and sometimes as juniors. It's just that the NBA is a higher profile league and there is a perception that all these kids are uneducated street punks.
Although the NBA has a point. It is their league and they can make their own rules. As long as they are constitutional.

the kids might get drafted in high school but if they don't sign with the team then they can go back and play in college. and i knew of a kid that got drafted like three times before he finally signed. ive never heard of a jr getting signed but i dont follow it really close. and playing in the rookie league or even A ball is basicly a glorified high school team. they get paid jack squat unless they are a first rounder and then there salary isnt that much. the signing bonus is what hooks most kids. but there are so many guys playing baseball when you consider every team has like three or four levels in there minor league system. that the huge majority of the kids that get drafted never make the big leagues. i dont really see how its a double standard they are completely different sports. baseball has been around sooo long that realize they have to take guys very young and then groom them into big league players. when in baketball if you are a freak of nature athlete you can excell by jumping over people. as a opposed to using fundementals. so i could be said that high schoolers could excell more easily in basketball. but baseball has a better training system in place for those that don't fourish. the stupid thing is that the owners have to protect them from themselves. they are afraid that if one team makes some stupid moves and shoot themselves in the foot then it hurts there team because then noone will come when that team is in town.wow i am really rambling.

 

[Chaplin]

Who cares where they go, they still sign big contracts and don't go to college.

That's just not true. Hockey is run in a similar way.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I've got a question - do you guys really think college is a place where one matuyres and figures out what to do with their money? I mean, as far as mtauring goes - there are just as many guys who have gone to college who are complete and utter screw-ups/problem children in the NBA as are the guys who came straight from high school.

I mean - Jermaine O'Neal and Stephen Jackson are the notable non-college NBA thugs after their performance in the Detriot brawl - but look at the maturity of the most notorious malcontents in the league: Artest, Iverson in his early days, Francis, Sheed, Patterson, Spreewell, Kenyon Martin, Carmelo - all of them went to college - didn't make them one bit smarter or more mature did it?

I just think people are people - good or bad, mature or not and college - a FANTASY LAND for college players - is NO WHERE to learn maturity. That's just my opinion. A bad apple's a bad apple no matter what "education" they have.

 

[myrondizzo]

i agree. im not saying there should be an age limit but comparing it to baseball is dumb. because they get treated like kids in the minors and they have plenty of chances to screw up and if they do they get benched so they learn there manners because if they dont there is someone nipping at there heels to replace them. i think going to college would be dumb and a complete waste of time if they were a shew in to make an impact in the pro right away. but i think that teams hurt themselves out of fear of letting a potential "pearl" slip by. so i think that they should be able to draft them and put them in some kind of developemental league until they are ready to contribute. i think they should have to go through a minor league system. bussed to games instead of chartered flights and 2 star hotel instead of 5. it will help them in the long run and make them appriciate what they have. when they make it big. they should teach them about finances and media and all that. all rookies would benefit from this not just the high schoolers.

 

[fordronken]

I've got a question - do you guys really think college is a place where one matuyres and figures out what to do with their money? I mean, as far as mtauring goes - there are just as many guys who have gone to college who are complete and utter screw-ups/problem children in the NBA as are the guys who came straight from high school.

To a degree, it is. Mainly, though, it's that it's a pretty difficult jump from living with your mom to being a millionaire and travelling on the road with a professional basketball team.

Maturity, however, isn't my reason for advocating an age limit. An age limit would make college basketball more interesting and it would mean that players who got drafted by bad teams would actually get immediate help. Sure, the draft would suck for the first two years, but after that, high draft picks would actually be impact players on a somewhat consistent basis. Granted, players can still become busts and NBA GMs will still blow picks, but players will get drafted and have a much better shot of playing right away.

I'm not too intensely driven one way or the other on the issue, but I do think that in the end, the quality of basketball being played would improve and I'm all for that. And while the "my family is poor and I can't walk away from the money" mentality is completely understandable, what about all of the poor families who don't have kids that are incredibly naturally gifted? I know poor families who want nothing more than for just one of their kids to have a chance to go to college. The poor families of basketball prodigies will survive another 2 years.

And in a worst case scenario, they can always be like LeBron's mom and borrow money from the bank with their son's talent as collateral...and buy a Hummer.

 

[Cheesebeef]

To a degree, it is. Mainly, though, it's that it's a pretty difficult jump from living with your mom to being a millionaire and travelling on the road with a professional basketball team.

Maturity, however, isn't my reason for advocating an age limit. An age limit would make college basketball more interesting and it would mean that players who got drafted by bad teams would actually get immediate help. Sure, the draft would suck for the first two years, but after that, high draft picks would actually be impact players on a somewhat consistent basis. Granted, players can still become busts and NBA GMs will still blow picks, but players will get drafted and have a much better shot of playing right away.

I'm not too intensely driven one way or the other on the issue, but I do think that in the end, the quality of basketball being played would improve and I'm all for that. And while the "my family is poor and I can't walk away from the money" mentality is completely understandable, what about all of the poor families who don't have kids that are incredibly naturally gifted? I know poor families who want nothing more than for just one of their kids to have a chance to go to college. The poor families of basketball prodigies will survive another 2 years.

And in a worst case scenario, they can always be like LeBron's mom and borrow money from the bank with their son's talent as collateral...and buy a Hummer.

I agree with all of the above. I can just see where the players are coming from. Undoubtedly college basketball would be better - but then again - it was pretty damn sick this year - although I too long for the days of true super-super stars in college basketball - as do I yearn for the days of better ball in the NBA - HOWEVER - the NBA is getting better and better and it's because of those guys who have come out early IMO.

There was such an absence of greatness in the Shaq Era of players and even after Shaq - but now - now with Lebron, KObe, Tracy, Amare, Garnett, we are being treated to the wonders of basektball again.

Either way - I don't really care allthat much - both sides have compelling arguments, I just thinbk it's a bit unfair to deny people work who are ready for it.

 

[fordronken]

I agree with all of the above. I can just see where the players are coming from. Undoubtedly college basketball would be better - but then again - it was pretty damn sick this year - although I too long for the days of true super-super stars in college basketball - as do I yearn for the days of better ball in the NBA - HOWEVER - the NBA is getting better and better and it's because of those guys who have come out early IMO.

There was such an absence of greatness in the Shaq Era of players and even after Shaq - but now - now with Lebron, KObe, Tracy, Amare, Garnett, we are being treated to the wonders of basektball again.

Either way - I don't really care allthat much - both sides have compelling arguments, I just thinbk it's a bit unfair to deny people work who are ready for it.

Those players would all still be here eventually, they'd just be here two years later. After the two year adjustment period, I think that it would, at least from a pure basketball perspective, be better for everyone involved.

 

[Joe Mama]

Those players would all still be here eventually, they'd just be here two years later. After the two year adjustment period, I think that it would, at least from a pure basketball perspective, be better for everyone involved.

I watched Jermaine O'Neal on ESPN earlier tonight with the NBA crew from over there. It was driving me nuts because O'Neal and Anthony seemed to completely miss this. For too many people this is an all or nothing rule. They see it as "if the guy doesn't come straight out of high school he isn't going to be here". It's ridiculous. Yes, many of the top players in the NBA are straight out of high school. Guess what? They still would have been the top players in the NBA if they had been taken two years later. However they likely would have contributed more and sooner, and they would have probably gone at the top of their drafts to the teams that truly needed them the most.

LeBron James and Amare Stoudemire are probably the two most successful straight from high school players back to and including Kevin Garnett. as good as those guys were in their rookie years can you imagine how much better they would have been after two years of college, development league, or international ball? It might not have worked out well for the Phoenix Suns, but he probably would have gone at the top of the draft instead of dropping to #9. Of course the problem is that these guys are the exception to the rule. They were two out of how many players that have gone straight to the NBA?

Every player is different, but for the most part a guy would come into the NBA more mature after a couple extra years of development than straight out of high school. However I do believe the age limit has almost nothing to do with the well-being of the young players entering the draft. That's what David Stern says, but he knows what it's really about. It's about improving the quality of the NBA, especially for the piss poor teams that are drafting in the lottery.

Right now teams like the LA Clippers, Golden State, etc. are taking players that are still just developing their basketball skills. Some people will say, "well that's their fault for making that mistake." That's just not true. The problem is there are only a couple of players with mature basketball skills who are ever worthy of a top draft pick any more. If these teams don't take the guy with enormous potential they are for the most part taking guys who would have fallen to the bottom of the first-round years ago.

I was frustrated to no end with Greg Anthony who kept saying that for every high school player who didn't contribute immediately he could find a four-year college player who also didn't contribute immediately. Well no kidding. That's not the point. The point is that if the high school player, prime example Jermaine O'Neal, had played somewhere else for two years he most likely would have been much more ready to contribute when he was drafted. You wouldn't have fallen to the bottom of the first round. In fact he probably would have been one of the top draft choices. He would have played immediately instead of sitting on the bench for four years. Lastly and most importantly he could have helped some team at the top of that draft more immediately and actually earned his paycheck.

Lastly, I think the idea of drafting these players when they are 18 years old and putting them in the developmental league doesn't help the problem. The NBA teams still don't have a good idea of what they are actually drafting. They still are not getting the immediate help they need. The player is still collecting a big check when he isn't actually contributing to his team. Frankly I think that solution is almost worse. I also don't think you'll ever see teams putting their top draft picks into a developmental league where they can get hurt. I don't think the agents would allow it. It's just a bad idea unless we are talking about second round draft picks or something like that.

Well, there's my $.02.

Joe Mama

 

[elindholm]

Well put, Joe Mama!

 

[Joe Mama]

Well put, Joe Mama!

you actually read all that?

Joe

 

[Drop D]

I'm not too intensely driven one way or the other on the issue, but I do think that in the end, the quality of basketball being played would improve and I'm all for that. And while the "my family is poor and I can't walk away from the money" mentality is completely understandable, what about all of the poor families who don't have kids that are incredibly naturally gifted? I know poor families who want nothing more than for just one of their kids to have a chance to go to college. The poor families of basketball prodigies will survive another 2 years.

Another way of looking at it is that more opportunities are created for less talented kids to play college ball. This actually helps some of the families that don't have kids that are incredibly naturally gifted. Not that this is a good thing for the fans, but it sure helps the kids that actually want to go to college.

 

[Drop D]

So send them to a developement league to refine their game. An investment firm won't hire someone until they show a degree. You cannot just get good grades in your first two years, you need to get the degree if you are going to handle millions.

Don't mean to stray off topic, but I have been a stock broker since '98 and I am still working on my bachelors degree. If I had a better jumpshot and better knees, I might have my degree by now. Though, I think that college can be overated at times, it is helpful in lieu of experience.

Shaq actually obtained his degree while in the NBA. At least some early entry players still see the value.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

Don't mean to stray off topic, but I have been a stock broker since '98 and I am still working on my bachelors degree. If I had a better jumpshot and better knees, I might have my degree by now. Though, I think that college can be overated at times, it is helpful in lieu of experience.

Shaq actually obtained his degree while in the NBA. At least some early entry players still see the value.

Maybe my analogy was off base, but I think the general idea is right still. As far as I know (which isn't a ton on that subject), you would be an exception. Kind of like Amare


Penny, Carter and several other players also got their degrees while in the NBA. Carter even pulled his infamous playoff move to attend his graduation.

Also, a lot of players speed up their graduation plans to finish in 3 years. I am pretty sure Okafor took that route.

 

[Stoner]

From today's AZ Republic:

"View from Press Row
Jermaine O'Neal is wrong. A 20-year-old age minimum isn't racist. It's just wrong. It's also more than just a little hypocritical. While NBA management talks about imposing the limit, it sells LeBron James as its next star. James could not have been drafted if the restriction had been in place when he came straight out of high school and joined the Cleveland Cavaliers. If an 18-year-old can go to war in Iraq, he can play in the NBA.
- Norm Frauenheim"

I have heard this "justification" frequently in regards to the age limit in the NBA. However, I find it to be a little ridiculous since the NBA is not the U.S. government. That argument works, when as a 19 year old, you complain that you can't buy a beer but you can go to war, because they are both government decisions.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the NBA is a private employer. They can make any decision they want in regards to their hiring criteria, if they feel it makes their business stronger, more profitable, etc.

If I am an 18 year old genius at accounting and ready to crunch numbers with the best of them, Arthur Andersen still isn't going to hire me for the position, no matter how good I am, because they require a bachelors degree in accounting and X number of years experience. This is neither racist, unconstitutional or wrong. It is smart business.

It is easy to say "Hey, if they can go to war, they can play basketball!" And on the surface, who wouldn't agree with that?. The problem with that "argument" is that it is a flawed comparison.

 

[clif]

Having an age limit isn't going to improve play in NBA nor is it going to curb dumbassness (made up my own word). All you would have is older ********* with the same play. If they want to improve the game they need to eliminate guaranteed contracts. pure and simple

 

[coloradosun]

From today's AZ Republic:

"View from Press Row
Jermaine O'Neal is wrong. A 20-year-old age minimum isn't racist. It's just wrong. It's also more than just a little hypocritical. While NBA management talks about imposing the limit, it sells LeBron James as its next star. James could not have been drafted if the restriction had been in place when he came straight out of high school and joined the Cleveland Cavaliers. If an 18-year-old can go to war in Iraq, he can play in the NBA.
- Norm Frauenheim"

I have heard this "justification" frequently in regards to the age limit in the NBA. However, I find it to be a little ridiculous since the NBA is not the U.S. government. That argument works, when as a 19 year old, you complain that you can't buy a beer but you can go to war, because they are both government decisions.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the NBA is a private employer. They can make any decision they want in regards to their hiring criteria, if they feel it makes their business stronger, more profitable, etc.

If I am an 18 year old genius at accounting and ready to crunch numbers with the best of them, Arthur Andersen still isn't going to hire me for the position, no matter how good I am, because they require a bachelors degree in accounting and X number of years experience. This is neither racist, unconstitutional or wrong. It is smart business.

It is easy to say "Hey, if they can go to war, they can play basketball!" And on the surface, who wouldn't agree with that?. The problem with that "argument" is that it is a flawed comparison.

Bill Gates did not finish college and went "pro". Nobody offered him a multi million dollar contract to start a software company. He had to find investors to take the risk that his product would sell. These 18-20 have no real experience producing at an NBA level and in the real world would not be hirable.

But the NBA has a supplemental flow of income and that is from endorsements. There are outside investors that are willing to take the risk that this individual will help them sell their products. That is where the arguement for making 18-20 eligible to be drafted come from. Most of the 18-20 will not play in their 1st two seasons and Jermaine O'Neal is the poster boy for that, and why should he be compensated by the team for not producing. But he could be able to produce results for the products he endorses. This would definitely give an incentive for the individual to clean up his act before he enters the league.

Go to my thread about my proposed solution on second round contracts only for 18-20 year olds.

 

[schutd]

You shouldn't get hired for a job based on the potential you have. You need to do some sort of work to prove that you are ready, whether it be experience or a degree.

The NBA is no different. These kids need to show that they are mature, coachable and able to live up to the hype. Whether that be in college, over seas or a developmental league - they need to prove it somewhere before a team invests millions into them.

No they don't! Thats the great part! The onus is on owners and teams to do their friggin homework on these kids. Don't think under 20 year old kids should be playing in the league? Stop friggin drafting them. In no way what so ever should an adult (18, right?) be kept from earning a living doing what he loves to do if theres a market for his wares.

Don't punish the players for having a league full of hypocritical rich white owners and management. Its THEIR fault the league is how it is, not the players'.

 

[coloradosun]

No they don't! Thats the great part! The onus is on owners and teams to do their friggin homework on these kids. Don't think under 20 year old kids should be playing in the league? Stop friggin drafting them. In no way what so ever should an adult (18, right?) be kept from earning a living doing what he loves to do if theres a market for his wares.

Don't punish the players for having a league full of hypocritical rich white owners and management. Its THEIR fault the league is how it is, not the players'.

How do you do homework on these kids without impairing their "civil rights". What are going to do hire private investigators to check into their behavior, that just opens the door for Jesse Jackson to get involved.

 

[schutd]

How do you do homework on these kids without impairing their "civil rights". What are going to do hire private investigators to check into their behavior, that just opens the door for Jesse Jackson to get involved.

Thats never going to go away regardless of the situation. Racism and all that? Hell, the majority of the players in the league are black, so any decision made by the league that doesnt bode well with some people will undoubtedly have the mantle taken by some player who will call the decision racist becasue it keeps a black man down. Well do the math, dummy. I get so sick of the racial tension created and perpetuated by both blacks and whites. its ludicrous.

But back on point, I too believe that even a couple of years of school for these kids would benfit everyone involved, and I agree that the league has the right, as a private entity, to impose whatever rules it sees fit in terms of requirements for employment.

But I think its silly to do so at this point becasue all your doing is protecting owners from themselves, and thats not fair to the kids who stand to benefit from stupid rich white peoples' loose wallets.

Heh. Im a total flip flopper, arent I?

 

[elindholm]

The league has all sorts of rules to protect incompetent owners or GMs from screwing up their teams. All teams in the league are in the same boat, and while it's nice for the winners to have losers to pick on, ultimately they need one another to survive.

The so-called Ted Stepien (sp?) Rule, preventing a team from trading away their first-round picks in consecutive future drafts, is a good example. The current draft lottery system is similar, in that it (partially) discourages the totally incompetent from losing a bunch of games on purpose. Even the salary cap rules are in the same category, attempting to discourage the Isiah Thomases and Donald Sterlings (on opposite ends of the spectrum) from screwing up their franchises with idiotic financial strategies.

Imposing an age limit on the draft would be similar. Some teams are smart enough not to gamble high picks on long-shot prospects, but others aren't. By protecting the weaker teams from their own stupidity, the rule would improve competitive balance, which is in the league's overall interest.