Andre Drummond should have stayed at UConn

[visitor123]

In Drummond's case over 8yrs he needs his 2nd contract to be $13.25MM (close to max) or greater for strictly the $ return of coming out a year early to earn more over the same period. So if Drummond signs at $13.425MM its a wash as below (for simplicity sake assumed no increases in both 2nd contracts) but note the downside risk much greater (note Drummond'd min 5th year 4.2 vs #1 pick min 9.6) due to the 30% inc qualifying offer:
Drummond v 2013 #1 Pick
2012-13 $2,356,320
2013-14 $2,462,400 v $5,324,280
2014-15 $2,568,360 v $5,563,976
2015-16 $3,272,090 v $5,803,400
2016-17 $13,425,000 (min $4.25) v $7,393,530
2017-18 $13,425,000 v $13.425-(MIN$9.6)
2018-19 $13,425,000 v $13,425,000
2019-20 $13,425,000 v $13,425,000
2020-21 $64,359,170 $64,360,186

I agree with your general conclusion that the sooner you can get past the 4yrs the better. But there is a mathematical argument that if you are VERY VERY likely to advance say 8+ spots in draft order it is worth staying - certainly at 10+ spots it becomes almost a no-brainer to stay. Of course these decisions can only be educated guesses. But it is worth looking at and studying the history. This is why some players come back to college, it is not unheard of and can be a smart decision. Ie. In above add extra endorsements from #1 pick and that wins, maybe even vs a max 2nd contract.

We're kind of in a pissing match so I'll stop. I'll just say if you're talking about min contracts and risk then clearly getting out early is better. We're working with the premise that if he outplays his contract and becomes a superstar then which is better. At least that's what you stated a few posts back.

You are also wrong about the salary. You're forgetting about raises.

"2017-18 $13,425,000 v $13.425-(MIN$9.6)"

In actuality Andre would be making 13.425 + max raise vs 13.425. It would be like that every year after. Andre always makes more in scenario one.