One and Done Coming to an End?

[NielsisGood]

Nothing.

But the counter argument is that not all the top recruits will go there because the lanes for playing time will be clogged.

But there's still going to be plenty of 1 and dones even if they change the NBA rule though. Recent draft history has shown as much. I don't see this rule change having a significant impact on Kentucky/Duke's roster situation.

 

[The Viking]

Here's my thinking about how it might change Kentucky and Duke - and maybe I'm wrong.

The difference between say 1-10 ranked kids and 11-20 is probably larger than the difference between 11-20 and 20-30.

Point being at some point after the first 10 kids, the difference between the next say 10-50 is not as large and the true value of games is rewarded to the better coaches, rather than just getting the best most ridiculous talent that can still overcome average to below average coaching.

And I'm pointing this toward both Calipari and K. K has had a great career but it seemed before the one and done's he was starting to lose his fastball - certainly in March Madness at least.

I dunno, just a thought.

 

[intlzncster]

Here's my thinking about how it might change Kentucky and Duke - and maybe I'm wrong.

The difference between say 1-10 ranked kids and 11-20 is probably larger than the difference between 11-20 and 20-30.

Point being at some point after the first 10 kids, the difference between the next say 10-50 is not as large and the true value of games is rewarded to the better coaches, rather than just getting the best most ridiculous talent that can still overcome average to below average coaching.

And I'm pointing this toward both Calipari and K. K has had a great career but it seemed before the one and done's he was starting to lose his fastball - certainly in March Madness at least.

I dunno, just a thought.

I agree w much of this. The top 10 or so, the nba kids, are ready to be lead dog college players right out of the gate (or mid season). So a team full of them can take you far come tournament time. The rest of the kids, not so much.

Given that, I do feel it would level the playing field a bit

 

[Ewekon]

I hate the one and done. Let players jump from HS. That said. Duke should be ashamed of itself. Duke is not "State U" as is Kentucky (meh) and yes. UConn. The academic6 bending there is atrocious. And K smiles all the way to the bank.

 

[temery]

Make the scholarship count for all four years, regardless of how long the players stays. Problem solved.

 

[The Viking]

Make the scholarship count for all four years, regardless of how long the players stays. Problem solved.

That's an interesting take, I think I like that. Almost serves as a salary cap in a way. A coach can't take on too many studs that he knows will just parachute into campus and bolt within 1-2 years.

 

[willie99]

Good, make coaches have to work harder and not always have most of the lottery picks from every draft on their team

Development AND academics (albeit to a lesser extent) will need to be reintroduced to a few schools (academic fraud will also find some new life)

 

[BlueMAB]

You are stupid if you think the players association will agree to 3 years

I haven’t finished reading the thread but this is exactly why you talk to the ncaa. They don’t have to negotiate with the players association

 

[jayfromfla]

Won't affect unc. They have straight A students

 

[jayfromfla]

How does uk stay eligible when they don't finish a year?

 

[the Q]

Well I would've passed a bar exam by the time I got to college. Very few could stay with me all night back then.

Don’t get my started on the silly bar exam. Ask a lawyer the last time they didn’t research a major issue for their clients.

 

[the Q]

I haven’t finished reading the thread but this is exactly why you talk to the ncaa. They don’t have to negotiate with the players association

Yes, they do. The draft is a collectively bargained issue that the players would abolish if they were smart. Even Baseball should. Be like the old days (that I wasn’t alive for) When real scouting talent and developing relationships with players mattered. Now you hand off elite talent to incompetent and undeserving tanktastic franchises.

 

[the Q]

But the NBA seems committed to having a 'minor league' system now. Given that, the players might be amenable, as it gives guys more of a chance to potentially stick and develop. It's not just an NCAA vs NBA thing. It's probably all going to depend on how the NBA potentially structures a new system.

NBA needs to step up and offer a real system and path to the NBA with each team having its own g league franchise that it can develop its talent for, just like minor league baseball. Just pay them some real money.

 

[Wordbomar]

Nothing.

But the counter argument is that not all the top recruits will go there because the lanes for playing time will be clogged.

Bingo

 

[pj]

You are stupid if you think the players association will agree to 3 years

Why? In baseball the players' union did. For the pro players, the best arrangement is one that keeps as many top players in college as possible, thereby limiting the competition for pro dollars.

 

[jazyj]

Why? In baseball the players' union did. For the pro players, the best arrangement is one that keeps as many top players in college as possible, thereby limiting the competition for pro dollars.

That argument makes no sense as there is little room for negotiation in rookie contracts. That money is going to 60 people every year regardless of whether they are all freshman or seniors. No new money for vets is created by raising the age limit, and if anything why would the NBA help out the NCAA instead of themselves. I think its funny how people here think that by raising the age limit, the NCAA will get a boost. That won’t happen, kids that want to leave will still leave whether that be overseas or the G-league, not much will change. The NBA has shown signs that it wants to make the G-league into a real minor league why would top kids go to college when they can make 6 figures for a year or 2 and the go to the NBA.

 

[intlzncster]

That argument makes no sense as there is little room for negotiation in rookie contracts. That money is going to 60 people every year regardless of whether they are all freshman or seniors. No new money for vets is created by raising the age limit, and if anything why would the NBA help out the NCAA instead of themselves. I think its funny how people here think that by raising the age limit, the NCAA will get a boost. That won’t happen, kids that want to leave will still leave whether that be overseas or the G-league, not much will change. The NBA has shown signs that it wants to make the G-league into a real minor league why would top kids go to college when they can make 6 figures for a year or 2 and the go to the NBA.

Kids don't seem to want to go to Europe. The option's been therefore ever, and it's pretty much only guys who fall through the cracks for whatever reason.

Until the G-League starts paying guys (35k ain't gonna cut it), that argument is moot.

It's gonna be up to the League to structure this right.

 

[jazyj]

Kids don't seem to want to go to Europe. The option's been therefore ever, and it's pretty much only guys who fall through the cracks for whatever reason.

Until the G-League starts paying guys (35k ain't gonna cut it), that argument is moot.

It's gonna be up to the League to structure this right.

Kids don’t got to Europe because as it stands right now they only have to wait a year to get paid. If you make it 3 years until they get paid I am willing to bet my life savings of $16.32 that more top kids will go to Europe

 

[David 76]

Make the scholarship count for all four years, regardless of how long the players stays. Problem solved.

Calipari could end up with no players, only vacated scholarship slots.
On second thought, I like it.

 

[Towney007]

The problem with that it is it normally takes years to develop competitive young baseball players. NBA talent is often ready far quicker.

Yes and no.

Possibly 3-4 players a year are *really* ready for the NBA immediately out of high school. That might even be pushing it. 10-20 are ready after a year of college. Most need at least 2 years of college, if not more plus D-League time and D-League usually means they probably won't stick in the NBA for a significant amount of time. While your top-tier talent breezes through, your average NBA talent is a 3-5 year development path through college/Europe/D-League.

Your average superstar talent in baseball is 1-2 years in the minors. 3-6 is your average development time. It's different, a narrower sample of talent and roster spots to be sure - but it's not *that* different.

 

[BlueMAB]

Yes, they do. The draft is a collectively bargained issue that the players would abolish if they were smart. Even Baseball should. Be like the old days (that I wasn’t alive for) When real scouting talent and developing relationships with players mattered. Now you hand off elite talent to incompetent and undeserving tanktastic franchises.

Why does the NCAA need to negotiate with the NBA player's association? The NBPA is, by definition, a collection of individuals who have nothing to do with the NCAA because they are ineligible.

It's got nothing to do with "smart". The draft isn't going anywhere because the owners won't allow it to. Just because something is collectively bargained, doesn't mean its on the table. Otherwise you could just make arguments like "the owners should reduce the salary cap to $10mm per season per contract.... if they were smart" or "the players should have the ability to veto any trade at any time in any contract.... if they were smart". or "the players should make the league minimum $5M/year..... if they were smart"

 

[the Q]

Why does the NCAA need to negotiate with the NBA player's association? The NBPA is, by definition, a collection of individuals who have nothing to do with the NCAA because they are ineligible.

It's got nothing to do with "smart". The draft isn't going anywhere because the owners won't allow it to. Just because something is collectively bargained, doesn't mean its on the table. Otherwise you could just make arguments like "the owners should reduce the salary cap to $10mm per season per contract.... if they were smart" or "the players should have the ability to veto any trade at any time in any contract.... if they were smart". or "the players should make the league minimum $5M/year..... if they were smart"

I thought you meant the NBA didn’t have to bargain with the nbpa.

The draft won’t go away because 1) the players were dumb enough to give it, and the genie is out of the bottle, and 2) fans are dumb enough to believe the owners when they claim it’s for “competitive balance.”

 

[BlueMAB]

I thought you meant the NBA didn’t have to bargain with the nbpa.

The draft won’t go away because 1) the players were dumb enough to give it, and the genie is out of the bottle, and 2) fans are dumb enough to believe the owners when they claim it’s for “competitive balance.”

No my point was that the NBPA has zero leverage to force the NCAA to agree to anything. But the NBA can try to discuss options with the NCAA to get them to institute rules that will be mutually beneficial, that the NBPA can't do anything about.

The draft is its own discussion. Eliminating doesn't do anything to help competitive balance either. Players are already working together to establish "super teams" as free agents. If the draft was removed from the equation, then teams like Milwaukee wouldn't have the talent they do now. And while the Sixers tanked for years, and were hit hard by the injury bug in the "process", they have built an exciting young team that should challenge for the Eastern conference title within a few years (assuming they keep their nucleus together).

I think the solution should be similar to baseball. Player can/should be drafted out of HS. He can consult with the team as to whether they want him now, or in college (instead of "stashing them overseas for a few years"). If he chooses college, they retain his rights for 3 years. He can come out at any time within those three seasons.

How much better would it have been for UConn and/or Hamilton and Daniels had they been able to return to college after the draft? Hamilton might not have, but I feel Daniels probably would have been better served with another season at UConn instead of going to Australia (though admittedly injuries have been his main issue).

In order to encourage taking school seriously, they could add a player option. If the player graduates within 4 years, he has the option of a guaranteed contract with the team that signed him (D league or better), or signing with any team as a free agent. If the team doesn't want to lose the player they will encourage him to leave school early and sign a contract before that option is exercised. If the player doesn't want to sign with that team, he will have honored the academic side of his contract with the university, and is rewarded with the potential for additional options.

This is all off the top of my head, and it may not be feasible. There also might be unintended consequences that I haven't thought of, it's just an idea for the sake of discussion.

 

[the Q]

No my point was that the NBPA has zero leverage to force the NCAA to agree to anything. But the NBA can try to discuss options with the NCAA to get them to institute rules that will be mutually beneficial, that the NBPA can't do anything about.

The draft is its own discussion. Eliminating doesn't do anything to help competitive balance either. Players are already working together to establish "super teams" as free agents. If the draft was removed from the equation, then teams like Milwaukee wouldn't have the talent they do now. And while the Sixers tanked for years, and were hit hard by the injury bug in the "process", they have built an exciting young team that should challenge for the Eastern conference title within a few years (assuming they keep their nucleus together).

I think the solution should be similar to baseball. Player can/should be drafted out of HS. He can consult with the team as to whether they want him now, or in college (instead of "stashing them overseas for a few years"). If he chooses college, they retain his rights for 3 years. He can come out at any time within those three seasons.

How much better would it have been for UConn and/or Hamilton and Daniels had they been able to return to college after the draft? Hamilton might not have, but I feel Daniels probably would have been better served with another season at UConn instead of going to Australia (though admittedly injuries have been his main issue).

In order to encourage taking school seriously, they could add a player option. If the player graduates within 4 years, he has the option of a guaranteed contract with the team that signed him (D league or better), or signing with any team as a free agent. If the team doesn't want to lose the player they will encourage him to leave school early and sign a contract before that option is exercised. If the player doesn't want to sign with that team, he will have honored the academic side of his contract with the university, and is rewarded with the potential for additional options.

This is all off the top of my head, and it may not be feasible. There also might be unintended consequences that I haven't thought of, it's just an idea for the sake of discussion.

The NBA and NCAA can’t do anything do the draft without the union. It is well established that the draft is an area subject to collective bargaining. Otherwise trying to block these kids would’ve triggered an anti trust suit years ago.

 

[BlueMAB]

The NBA and NCAA can’t do anything do the draft without the union. It is well established that the draft is an area subject to collective bargaining. Otherwise trying to block these kids would’ve triggered an anti trust suit years ago.

I know the NCAA can't, but the NBA did block the kids with the one and done rule, so it's not like they can't get anything done on the draft. I can see players agreeing to having their rights drafted without foregoing a college career. It takes the pressure off the decision of when to go pro. It allows the NCAA to keep more talent. And fans win because these guys aren't over in China or Australia or Europe, they are allowed to develop here. Add the guaranteed contract (which 2nd rounders don't get now) and the player option that gives them a path to immediate free agency with a college degree, and I can see reasons why the NBPA would agree to the suggested changes.

They can do something with the draft, they did when they instituted the one and done rule. They just need to find the right terms that will satisfy the NBA and NBPA, and hopefully as a byproduct, improve the game in the NCAA.

Also, I didn't say anything about "blocking" the kids. Quite the opposite, I'm saying they should be drafted without losing eligibility. If they haven't signed a contract, then they haven't ceased being an amateur, some NBA team simply has their rights when they do go pro.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Yes and no.

Possibly 3-4 players a year are *really* ready for the NBA immediately out of high school. That might even be pushing it. 10-20 are ready after a year of college. Most need at least 2 years of college, if not more plus D-League time and D-League usually means they probably won't stick in the NBA for a significant amount of time. While your top-tier talent breezes through, your average NBA talent is a 3-5 year development path through college/Europe/D-League.

Your average superstar talent in baseball is 1-2 years in the minors. 3-6 is your average development time. It's different, a narrower sample of talent and roster spots to be sure - but it's not *that* different.

This is right, its silly that so much time is spent arguing about requiring one year of college b/c changing that would help so few players. It would let more high school kids get paid, but more of them would fail and NBA teams would be over-paying in money, time and risk. Plus NBA would have to devote more resources to less effective evaluation of high school kids.

The rule can't be perfect, more kids & more NBA teams are helped by requiring 1 year of college than are hurt. And it helps the college game. Colleges win, NBA wins, non-ready kids win and a few isolated losses. Guys like Ben Simmons that don't belong in college lose and are fake students gaming the system, but there just aren't enough of those situations to legislate around that.

No college would flip to NBA, Colleges and most kids lose and 3-4 players and teams win. Not worth it.

 

[the Q]

I know the NCAA can't, but the NBA did block the kids with the one and done rule, so it's not like they can't get anything done on the draft. I can see players agreeing to having their rights drafted without foregoing a college career. It takes the pressure off the decision of when to go pro. It allows the NCAA to keep more talent. And fans win because these guys aren't over in China or Australia or Europe, they are allowed to develop here. Add the guaranteed contract (which 2nd rounders don't get now) and the player option that gives them a path to immediate free agency with a college degree, and I can see reasons why the NBPA would agree to the suggested changes.

They can do something with the draft, they did when they instituted the one and done rule. They just need to find the right terms that will satisfy the NBA and NBPA, and hopefully as a byproduct, improve the game in the NCAA.

Also, I didn't say anything about "blocking" the kids. Quite the opposite, I'm saying they should be drafted without losing eligibility. If they haven't signed a contract, then they haven't ceased being an amateur, some NBA team simply has their rights when they do go pro.

The NBA blocked them with the consent of the players association. the NBA cannot unilaterally make that change. And the players agreed, because as we've seen year after year, athletes are terrible at handling their business. They continue to get railed in CBA negotiations and leads them to make poor hiring decisions (Tony Clark, DeMo Smith, this new chick for the NBPA) who each get beat up badly at the negotiating table. This is one of the places the players should be giving the agents a bigger voice at.

Also, the Commissioner should be a neutral 3rd party, paid a % of the basketball revenue, but that's a separate issue.

 

[BlueMAB]

The NBA blocked them with the consent of the players association. the NBA cannot unilaterally make that change. And the players agreed, because as we've seen year after year, athletes are terrible at handling their business. They continue to get railed in CBA negotiations and leads them to make poor hiring decisions (Tony Clark, DeMo Smith, this new chick for the NBPA) who each get beat up badly at the negotiating table. This is one of the places the players should be giving the agents a bigger voice at.

Also, the Commissioner should be a neutral 3rd party, paid a % of the basketball revenue, but that's a separate issue.

okayyy....but as I said, my suggestion doesn't block anyone, in fact it makes it easier for them to get drafted without having to worry about eliminating their opportunity to play in college. It literally does the opposite of what you keep saying the NBA "can't do" (but already did).

 

[The Funster]

Have to stay three years??? This makes less sense than forcing kids to attend for a year. So we'll punish the players and their ability to earn money for college basketball fans?

If a kid doesn't want to go to college he can go overseas. If he wants to leave college after 2 years he can go overseas. I'd just like to see kids stay in college for 3 years. I'll settle for 2, no biggie.

 

[RJScootin]

If a kid doesn't want to go to college he can go overseas. If he wants to leave college after 2 years he can go overseas. I'd just like to see kids stay in college for 3 years. I'll settle for 2, no biggie.

These kids should live in the same free market all Americans do. Forcing them to earn money for NCAA and get free development for NBA is a joke.