New NBA commish Adam Silver priortizes raising the age limit for NBA

[alexrgct]

You can read the ESPN article here. Silver says pushing the minimum age for entering the NBA back to 20 is a "top priority".

If it happens, I think it's great for CBB as a product. Imagine if Lebron James and Kobe Bryant had to play college ball for two years before entering the draft, or if Kevin Durant had to play two years rather than one. Only deepens the talent pool, IMO.

 

[NJHusky]

You can read the ESPN article here. Silver says pushing the minimum age for entering the NBA back to 20 is a "top priority".

If it happens, I think it's great for CBB as a product. Imagine if Lebron James and Kobe Bryant had to play college ball for two years before entering the draft, or if Kevin Durant had to play two years rather than one. Only deepens the talent pool, IMO.

Squid will be the happiest coach in the country if this happens....no more 1 n done

 

[BUHusky]

Squid will be the happiest coach in the country if this happens....no more 1 n done

But that means his players will need to actually go to class 2nd semester freshman year and 1st semester sophomore year. Gasp. The humanity.

 

[UCONNfan1]

Squid will be the happiest coach in the country if this happens....no more 1 n done

I totally agree. Great for Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, UNC. Not great for UCONN. Can you imagine Kentucky if all their freshmen were required to return next year?

Having said that, nothing to stop them from heading to Europe for a year to earn $ instead of toiling away in college. But i think that would only help the teams who feast primarily on one and done kids.

 

[James]

Should allow high schoolers to enter IMO. that would cut down on the 1&doners by like 75%. Its like Silver believes the lack of developed talent in the nba is the players fault, they aren't the ones doing the drafting.

 

[UC990411]

I totally agree. Great for Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, UNC. Not great for UCONN. Can you imagine Kentucky if all their freshmen were required to return next year?

Having said that, nothing to stop them from heading to Europe for a year to earn $ instead of toiling away in college. But i think that would only help the teams who feast primarily on one and done kids.

But at the same time it will cut down the amount of recruits those schools can sign a year, the talent pool will be deeper.

 

[uconNYC]

UConn will adjust. KO is going to bring in monster classes.

 

[UCDaveD]

I'd like a modified version of what baseball does. If you want to go to the NBA out of high school, go. But if you elect to go to college, you have to stay at least 2 years.

 

[Sportsman5]

A couple things.
1) if sophomores returned, than Kentucky couldn't sell immediate playing time as a freshman and recruiting would totally change.
2) a lot of top high school players will end up playing pro somewhere besides the NBA while they wait for the draft. People like Mark Cuban currently think the D league is a better option for the very top high school recruits who are likely 1 and done candidates.
3) it's 20 years old and not 2 years removed from high school. Many players start school late in kindergarten, repeat a year of high school, or do a prep year. So many D1 college freshman come in at 19 years old and turn 20 during the season.

 

[ASweet3781]

You can read the ESPN article here. Silver says pushing the minimum age for entering the NBA back to 20 is a "top priority".

If it happens, I think it's great for CBB as a product. Imagine if Lebron James and Kobe Bryant had to play college ball for two years before entering the draft, or if Kevin Durant had to play two years rather than one. Only deepens the talent pool, IMO.

Yeah the men's CBB product needs a ton of tweeking as a product after one of the greatest tournaments from start to finish in recent years.

That's real rich reading a statement like that from a poster who posts primarily on the women's hoop board. One session either afternoon or evening of the men's tournament (pick any round) gave more heart stopping competitive exciting high quality moments than anything I saw out of the women's tournament which was one blow out after blow out after blow out from start to finish. The women's tournament was beyond boring and most of the quality of play was embarassingly weak (I know, I tried to get into it.) You should worry about that product a little more. It kinda sucks right now outside of 2 teams (Us and ND).

BTW, this tweek would be terrible for UConn men's basketball judging by our history, how we recruit, and how we win. We don't have pundits/ESPN/media actively recruiting on our behalf like Duke, Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, Syracuse, do. Hence why we win with so many under the radar types who stay together 3-4 years. "Hungry" Huskies. Funny how we starting making Final Fours around the time the elite players stopped staying 3-4 years. That's not a coincidence.

The "power 5" dominate college football and control the bowls. If this age limit passes they will control college hoops too. They have the money, resources, and media mouthpieces to get the top recruits who this rule would effect.

If a player is talented enough that he wants to give it a go after a year it is absurd to prevent him from doing so.

 

[ASweet3781]

A couple things.
1) if sophomores returned, than Kentucky couldn't sell immediate playing time as a freshman and recruiting would totally change.
2) a lot of top high school players will end up playing pro somewhere besides the NBA while they wait for the draft. People like Mark Cuban currently think the D league is a better option for the very top high school recruits who are likely 1 and done candidates.
3) it's 20 years old and not 2 years removed from high school. Many players start school late in kindergarten, repeat a year of high school, or do a prep year. So many D1 college freshman come in at 19 years old and turn 20 during the season.

Wishful thinking on your part if you don't think a Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, UNC, would find ways to still convince talented freshman to come. There's always ways to find room.

 

[Strummer]

Yeah, we're like an old married couple having the same conversation over and over.
So I'll put my part out there again, as the distinct minority.

Adults should be able to do whatever they want. We define "adult," legally in this country, usually, as when you turn 18 or when you graduate high school.

Creating a rule to block 18 year olds from entering the NBA is just a fundamentally immoral restriction of a person's right to choose his own path.

The only motivation for doing it is money.

1. NCAA makes more money because young people are being discriminated against.
2. NBA older players get to play a little longer and make more money, and or the NBA becomes a better product (allegedly).

1 is probably indisputable. The "better product" argument is probably crap. Would the NBA be a better product without Randle, Wiggins, and Parker next year? Seems unlikely, if by "better" you mean "more talent and more action." If you mean watching some guy less exciting than those 3 but who has had a few years to season in the NBA, then meh. Maybe.

Ultimately, the point is the same - blocking a man from pursuing his career for a BS reason is just flat wrong.

The 1 and done rule sucks crap. The 2 and done rule would suck more crap, and I really, really hope that, if they do that, the top 10 recruits in the country go to Europe to stick it up their asses.

 

[caw]

Wishful thinking on your part if you don't think a Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, UNC, would find ways to still convince talented freshman to come. There's always ways to find room.

If UK had the following returning this year:
A Harrison
A Harrison
Young
Randle
Johnson
Lee

Would they still get:
Ullis
Booker
Towns
Lyle?

I dunno, but they would still lose to UConn.

 

[Inyatkin]

This is a way to further deny people a right to legitimate compensation for their work. It has nothing to do with bettering the product at either level. The NCAA gets more unpaid stars, the NBA gets a more complete developmental system.

 

[ASweet3781]

If UK had the following returning this year:
A Harrison
A Harrison
Young
Randle
Johnson
Lee

Would they still get:
Ullis
Booker
Towns
Lyle?

I dunno, but they would still lose to UConn.

If they returned all those players the following year, they wouldn't have to get any of the next years. But they likely would still get a good deal of them based on Calipari's snake oil. And a player like Lee would probably be "encouraged" to look elsewhere.

And if the 2014 class doesn't go to Kentucky beause the 2013 class is back for their sophmore years, does that mean 1 or 2 goes to UConn? History suggests otherwise. Big risk to think this helps us out any. We rarely get these guys who this rule would keep in school.

I don't know, the current model seems to be working really well for UConn. 4 National Titles, 5 Final Fours. Not sure that'd continue if these NBA lottery picks (who never seem to choose us) stay 2 years. You wanna risk that the room runs out at Kentucky, Duke, and Kansas and we get the left overs? That's a big risk. Let them get their one and done's and lose in the 1st and 2nd round while we get the under ranked 3-4 year guys looking to prove themselves and who go on deep title runs every 2-3 years.

 

[Inyatkin]

We're going to tell the next LeBron, sorry, you have to put off your paycheck and endorsements for two years while Mark Emmert gets rich off your work. It's because NBA GMs are terrible at their jobs.
Great idea.

 

[champs99and04]

People who think this rule is going to hurt UConn are off-base. Obviously programs like Kentucky, UNC, and Duke will benefit, but what it would do more than anything is strengthen the sport as a whole. It's all about the ripple-down effect: if John Wall, Demarcus Cousins, and Eric Bledsoe are around for multiple years, Brandon Knight, Doron Lamb, and Terrence Jones aren't going there.

I also don't think we should assume that the recruiting philosophy of Jim Calhoun is going to be unchanged under Ollie. Calhoun had as good an eye for talent as anybody I've ever seen, and he was also one of the best teachers and developers of all-time. Ollie appears to have inherited many of Calhoun's distinguished traits - to what extent, we'll find out over time - but he's also more energetic, articulate, and relatable than Calhoun ever was, and as a result of that, I suspect he'll reel in a lot of the big fish that Calhoun missed out on. Hell, Ollie hauled two McDonald's all-Americans one year removed from probation and at a time when UConn was completely out of the public eye. Now that UConn has won a national championship and NBA legends are freely volunteering their glowing recommendations, I don't think people here quite understand how unprecedented a run Ollie is about to have on the recruiting trail.

 

[Sportsman5]

Wishful thinking on your part if you don't think a Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, UNC, would find ways to still convince talented freshman to come. There's always ways to find room.

The current selling point at kentucky is that 4-5 starters are 99% leaving for the NBA and you will be one of the 3 or 4 most talented players on the team when you come as a freshman. That theoretically wouldn't be the case anymore. It will change the game for Kentucky recruiting without question. However, their results on the court might be better.

Duke, UNC, and Kansas get occasional one and done players, but it won't affect them much. For example, Duke has had 4 in their history including parker this year. I think it will mean less talent in the NCAA, but a higher quality of play. I think everyone wins because the guys who desperately want to go pro will do that and the top teams in college basketball can go back to focusing on developing talent and have more stable recruiting with less 1 and 2 year players.

 

[DDaileyuconn]

Give the kids option, like baseball, football, if u go to college it's 3 year, if u don't go to the nba minor league, watch those billion dollars deals, with cbs, TNT go to 500,000 deals, nba and college need 1 and done, don't be fool by this bs. Only2 sports pay the bill football and basketball both black own.

 

[ASweet3781]

The current selling point at kentucky is that 4-5 starters are 99% leaving for the NBA and you will be one of the 3 or 4 most talented players on the team when you come as a freshman. That theoretically wouldn't be the case anymore. It will change the game for Kentucky recruiting without question. However, their results on the court might be better.

Duke, UNC, and Kansas get occasional one and done players, but it won't affect them much. For example, Duke has had 4 in their history including parker this year. I think it will mean less talent in the NCAA, but a higher quality of play. I think everyone wins because the guys who desperately want to go pro will do that and the top teams in college basketball can go back to focusing on developing talent and have more stable recruiting with less 1 and 2 year players.

Everyone wins?

Under the current climate and system UConn wins more than anybody.

That's the winning I like.

 

[intlzncster]

A couple things.
1) if sophomores returned, than Kentucky couldn't sell immediate playing time as a freshman and recruiting would totally change.
2) a lot of top high school players will end up playing pro somewhere besides the NBA while they wait for the draft. People like Mark Cuban currently think the D league is a better option for the very top high school recruits who are likely 1 and done candidates.
3) it's 20 years old and not 2 years removed from high school. Many players start school late in kindergarten, repeat a year of high school, or do a prep year. So many D1 college freshman come in at 19 years old and turn 20 during the season.

I don't see guys going pro in Europe at all. That takes a special kind of kid and situation. Jennings was unusual, and it was really tough for him. In many ways, playing in Europe is more difficult than the NBA because their is much less of a support system in place.

Maybe some will go D-League, but that doesn't give you as much exposure -> which is less marketing potential/deals.

 

[intlzncster]

Yeah the men's CBB product needs a ton of tweeking as a product after one of the greatest tournaments from start to finish in recent years.

That's real rich reading a statement like that from a poster who posts primarily on the women's hoop board. One session either afternoon or evening of the men's tournament (pick any round) gave more heart stopping competitive exciting high quality moments than anything I saw out of the women's tournament which was one blow out after blow out after blow out from start to finish. The women's tournament was beyond boring and most of the quality of play was embarassingly weak (I know, I tried to get into it.) You should worry about that product a little more. It kinda sucks right now outside of 2 teams (Us and ND).

Easy does it sweet. He's probably men's fan too and is entitled to an opinion. While primarily a women's fan, I'd stay on the Women's board if I got this kind of reception any time I poked my head over the fence.

BTW, this tweek would be terrible for UConn men's basketball judging by our history, how we recruit, and how we win. We don't have pundits/ESPN/media actively recruiting on our behalf like Duke, Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, Syracuse, do. Hence why we win with so many under the radar types who stay together 3-4 years. "Hungry" Huskies. Funny how we starting making Final Fours around the time the elite players stopped staying 3-4 years. That's not a coincidence.

The "power 5" dominate college football and control the bowls. If this age limit passes they will control college hoops too. They have the money, resources, and media mouthpieces to get the top recruits who this rule would effect.

If a player is talented enough that he wants to give it a go after a year it is absurd to prevent him from doing so.

I don't think it would be terrible for us. If Ollie can recruit like JC, then we'll still be in the hunt year in year out. Our teams from late 90s early 2000s were damn good, and players did not one and done so often. Are you saying that talented sophomores will be unbeatable? I don't think so. And they'll be gone after that year.

I don't think it was players simply leaving early that allowed us to win championships. We had been knocking on the door for years.

There's also the possibility that Ollie will be able to recruit better than JC in the current environment. He's got a lot of things going for him that JC did not (and this is coming from an inveterate JC supporter).

I get not being in a P5 is a huge albatross, but I'm hoping that will change in the next couple of years.

On the bold quote, that is entirely up to the NBA and what product they want to put on the floor. I've heard it's not all about talent, but maturity level for them. They also want to get a better handle on a player than simply one year in MCBB.

 

[Sportsman5]

Everyone wins?

Under the current climate and system UConn wins more than anybody.

That's the winning I like.

This change will likely cause a system to develop where there is a clear path for high schoolers who want to skip college and start playing pro ball. Right now there is no clear path, but that would likely change. It is better for high school kids no doubt about that. I believe it is better for college coaches because there is more predictability in recruiting and it is easier to develop team chemistry from one year to the next. Fans of teams who currently have 1 and done and 2 and done players will benefit because they can get more attached to players and see more consistent play from their team. Many players who would have been 2 and done players will probably also choose to directly jump to the pros in the knew system if there is a clear path to play some sort of pro ball and quickly get a shot at the NBA.

 

[Sportsman5]

I don't see guys going pro in Europe at all. That takes a special kind of kid and situation. Jennings was unusual, and it was really tough for him. In many ways, playing in Europe is more difficult than the NBA because their is much less of a support system in place.

Maybe some will go D-League, but that doesn't give you as much exposure -> which is less marketing potential/deals.

I agree that the likely path is not through Europe. I think the D-league evolves into something bigger than it currently is. The NBA would love to have D-league games be aired on TV on the nights where there is a light schedule of NBA games. Imagine if the top 20 high school players each year were all playing in the D-league. That would add a tremendous amount of talent and excitement that the D-league currently lacks. I think the league would become less of an exhibition game and more of a league based on overall development. That being said, I think it could also be an opportunity for up and coming coaches to get head coaching experience. This is questionable at the current time because the games are sort of exhibition/ all-star games with a lot more offense than defense being played.

 

[TheChamps990411]

Since 2009 UK has had like 17 MCDAA and Uconn i believe has had 2. In that time we`ve been to 3 Final Fours and have two national titles. UK 3 Final Fours and 1 title. How did those loaded classes do against us in the Final Four twice? Squid didnt even make the tournament last year. how many F4s has he been to and only won once! In the end it comes town to team chemistry,luck and coaching. uk 2012 had great chemistry,luck and cal didnt have to coach against any of the heavyweights of coaching until the F4 and when he did his team was just more talented and the games didnt come down to crunch time where one wrong move can cost you the game. We`ll be fine and we wont be short on talent.