It's Gettin' Late Early-- The Key to Returning College BB (and Duke) to Former Glory

[Mudge]

There is an interesting article on in the current issue of ESPN Magazine called "It's Getting Late Early" (for the first classes of HS-direct-to-NBA stars). (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...3fid%3d4978548) The argument is made that these straight-to-the-pros stars (and by extension the one-and-done stars today) are not able to play any longer in the NBA than those who come in at 21-22 years old (vs. 18-19 years old)-- there appears to be only so many miles allowed on the odometer before the players' bodies start to break down from the travel, practice, and heavy game schedules. ESPN argues that Tracy McGrady only got about 10 years (and he wasn't a starter for his first 2-3 years) before his body gave out 2 years ago; Kevin Garnett basically hasn't been the same for the last 2 years, (since he was 31, I believe); Shaun Livingston, Tyson Chandler and Eddie Curry have been decimated by injuries; Iverson is a shell of his former self at 31 (and has been for 2 years); Kobe is starting to have frequent, regular injuries, although he is playing (with great pain) through them. Few of these HS or hardship phenoms (other than Moses Malone) look likely to have extended careers, where they are healthy and productive any longer than 3-4 year college players. In fact, there is an argument to be made that the most durable NBA players are the ones who came at 21-22 years old, after a 3-4 year college career, when their bodies were more fully mature when they arrived. (See Karl Malone, John Stockton, Lew Alcindor, Gary Payton, Robert Parish, Herb Williams, Shaq, heck, even injury-wracked Grant Hill is having a resurgence at 38 years old.)

So how does this benefit college basketball and Duke? If the NBA teams know that they are not going to get more total productive years out of HS/one-and-done players, why would they want to baby-sit them for several years, while they mature (a` la Toronto with Tracy McGrady), when they could get just as many years (starting at a higher level) out of a 3-4 year college player. The NBA management will be motivated to try to move the collective bargaining agreement back to 3 or more years of college/post-HS development, before a player is eligible for the league-- and they may be able to argue that it is being done for the health, well-being, and longevity of the players.

If more of the very best players come to college for 3-4 years, Duke is likely to get more of the very best players again, by virtue of having the highest profile coach in the sport-- it is fairly well known that Kobe Bryant would have attended Duke, had he gone to college; I have heard credible rumors that LeBron James would have done the same. Who would you like to have had over the last half-decade, a period when UNC surpassed Duke with Hansborough, Felton, and Lawson-- Hansborough or LeBron James (who is less than 1 year older than Hansborough)? How about Raymond Felton or Shaun Livingston (1 year younger than Felton)? How about Tywon Lawson or John Wall (3 years younger than Lawson), assuming that Wall perhaps makes a different decision about Duke, knowing how Duke/Krzyzewski feel about one-year players, if he is planning to be in college more than one year?

Suddenly, Duke is likely to be right there with (perhaps even ahead of) UNC, for the best recruits, if it becomes normal for the best HS players to go to college for 3-4 years again. We could reasonably hope for the return of the 1998-2003 golden era (that was undermined by the Brand/Avery/Maggette early departures) when Duke had better talent than anyone in the country.

[Kedsy]

If more of the very best players come to college for 3-4 years, Duke is likely to get more of the very best players again, by virtue of having the highest profile coach in the sport-- it is fairly well known that Kobe Bryant would have attended Duke, had he gone to college; I have heard credible rumors that LeBron James would have done the same. Who would you like to have had over the last half-decade, a period when UNC surpassed Duke with Hansborough, Felton, and Lawson-- Hansborough or LeBron James (who is less than 1 year older than Hansborough)? How about Raymond Felton or Shaun Livingston (1 year younger than Felton)? How about Tywon Lawson or John Wall (3 years younger than Lawson), assuming that Wall perhaps makes a different decision about Duke, knowing how Duke/Krzyzewski feel about one-year players, if he is planning to be in college more than one year?

Suddenly, Duke is likely to be right there with (perhaps even ahead of) UNC, for the best recruits, if it becomes normal for the best HS players to go to college for 3-4 years again. We could reasonably hope for the return of the 1998-2003 golden era (that was undermined by the Brand/Avery/Maggette early departures) when Duke had better talent than anyone in the country.

I don't know. I heard LeBron would have gone to Ohio State if he hadn't gone pro. And I've never heard he ever even considered Duke.

The other thing is, I think Duke is doing just fine right now with recruiting (HB notwithstanding). I don't think not having the one-and-done option would turn kids away from UNC or Kentucky. If John Wall didn't want to come here for one year, why would he want to be here for three?

Duke had great recruiting classes in the HS classes of 97 and 99. We also had great recruiting classes in 02 and 05. I don't think it was the one-and-done rule that kept the Duke 05 HS class from living up to expectations. So I guess what I'm saying is from a recruiting standpoint the "good old days" weren't as good as you remember and the past few years weren't as bad as you assume. If the NBA changes its policy things would be different, certainly, but they wouldn't necessarily be either better or worse.

[Bob Green]

If the NBA changes its policy things would be different, certainly, but they wouldn't necessarily be either better or worse.

This observation is spot on. Change isn't always progress. While I would like to see the best young ball players stay in college for 3 or 4 years, I agree it is a leap to automatically assume Duke would benefit from the changed practice.

[Mudge]

I don't know. I heard LeBron would have gone to Ohio State if he hadn't gone pro. And I've never heard he ever even considered Duke.

The other thing is, I think Duke is doing just fine right now with recruiting (HB notwithstanding). I don't think not having the one-and-done option would turn kids away from UNC or Kentucky. If John Wall didn't want to come here for one year, why would he want to be here for three?

Duke had great recruiting classes in the HS classes of 97 and 99. We also had great recruiting classes in 02 and 05. I don't think it was the one-and-done rule that kept the Duke 05 HS class from living up to expectations. So I guess what I'm saying is from a recruiting standpoint the "good old days" weren't as good as you remember and the past few years weren't as bad as you assume. If the NBA changes its policy things would be different, certainly, but they wouldn't necessarily be either better or worse.

In Ohio, you hear comments that James seriously considered Duke... and his favorable reactions to working with Coach K on the Olympic team have included some similar comments-- of course, this is the guy who also thought about leaving HS early, to declare for the NBA, so who knows...
I am suggesting that Wall may have been ambivalent about Duke (and Duke about him), knowing that he is highly likely (much more than say, Luol Deng was anticipated to be, or Corey Maggette) to only attend college one year... remove the possibility of leaving early, and I think it might have changed Wall's mind about Duke somewhat.

[moonpie23]

i still think the nba AND the players assoc are missing the boat by not setting up the D-league better....

they could really break the one-and-dones in so much better, develop revenue streams and let the one-and-dones just skip college all together...


now i would PREFER that the hot players came to duke for 4 years, but...that's just not fair...

[OldSchool]

i still think the nba AND the players assoc are missing the boat by not setting up the D-league better....

they could really break the one-and-dones in so much better, develop revenue streams and let the one-and-dones just skip college all together...


now i would PREFER that the hot players came to duke for 4 years, but...that's just not fair...

This, right on.

Junk the one-and-done rule. If kids have no interest in a college education, and someone will pay them a handsome salary for playing basketball, then so be it.

[tommy]

I am suggesting that Wall may have been ambivalent about Duke (and Duke about him), knowing that he is highly likely (much more than say, Luol Deng was anticipated to be, or Corey Maggette) to only attend college one year... remove the possibility of leaving early, and I think it might have changed Wall's mind about Duke somewhat.

I think you could make the opposite case. I strongly suspect (though it'd be next to impossible to obtain proof) that guys like Wall, and many others over the years, simply don't want to be challenged academically like they would be at Duke. They just want to play ball and enjoy the social life of a big time college baller, without the academic responsibilities. If that hypothesis is correct, then athletes like Wall might actually be less likely to come to Duke, where'd they have to do several years of real schoolwork, as opposed to just having to deal with it for one year under the current system.

[MarkD83]

If you have to attend school for 3 years you can't just squeak through 1 semester and just play ball. Some kids might start to reconsider the fact that "I am at school for 3 years I might as well get a good education".

The other factor playing into this would be the thought that a player should go to a school where they can learn what it takes to be a good basketball player rather than just an athletic basketball player. In this case a player may want someone who will teach the game rather than just roll the ball out and tell you to go play.

[Rudy]

If the NBA teams know that they are not going to get more total productive years out of HS/one-and-done players, why would they want to baby-sit them for several years, while they mature (a` la Toronto with Tracy McGrady), when they could get just as many years (starting at a higher level) out of a 3-4 year college player. The NBA management will be motivated to try to move the collective bargaining agreement back to 3 or more years of college/post-HS development, before a player is eligible for the league-- and they may be able to argue that it is being done for the health, well-being, and longevity of the players.

I don't buy the premise, that NBA management looks long term when it selects players. The contracts generally aren't long term and players tend to move. The hope is that a short term college player will be a franchise changer--like LeBron or Chris Paul. The question of investment commitment to a possible short term player applies to colleges just as well--why should a college team invest the time and scholarship slot to a player who is only going to be around a short time--is answered the same way: because the colleges hope the talent is good enough for the short time to help the program.

[Saratoga2]

Just look at this year and you see, in Scout.com at least, that we landed 1 top player. I would suggest that many of the players out there don't qualify academically or are uninterested in the rigors of a challenging education. That leaves a lot of the schools with those requirements trying to recruit from a smaller pool of players. It is difficult to compete with one or two top players a year without having them stay for 3 or 4 years. I think coach K 's strategy is to try to get players who will stay in the program, unlike a Kentucky, where Calipari is happy to get as many one and doners as possible. His program will probably show more variability over the years.

[Spret42]

This, right on.

Junk the one-and-done rule. If kids have no interest in a college education, and someone will pay them a handsome salary for playing basketball, then so be it.

It is called a legitimate minor league system and it has worked in baseball and hockey forever. I have never quite understood why it has never been developed in basketball.

Develop the D-League into a real quality minor league system where NBA teams can send their young draft picks to be trained and taught year round while being paid a moderate (75-150K) salary. It will lead to a much better NBA product.

[Skitzle]

Credible Rumors?

[JohnGalt]

it is fairly well known that Kobe Bryant would have attended Duke, had he gone to college.

When contemplating this, thinking of how he would have been a senior on the '99 team, the venerable Robert Plant's words come to mind...'what is and what should never be'...

I think you have overscored the impact of the 'one and done rule' on Duke while underscoring it elsewhere. Virtually all of Ohio State's big recruits have been one and dones during the Thad Matta era. What if Oden, Conely, and Cook were all still there? Carolina's lost J.R. Smith before he arrived on campus and Wright and Marvin Williams after a year, among others.

I think when it comes down to it, most of the high level programs have taken serious and - for the most part - equal hits because of this.

As a side note...I absolutely agree that there should be a more suitable minor league system developed. Realistically speaking, it's not fair to the players. As mentioned above, the NBA - despite what they claim - is looking for short term production. How many of these foreign "projects" end up panning out? The guy is drafted, left in whichever country, and never heard from again. It would benefit everyone invovled to have a legitimate minor league system that paid reasonably well and actively developed those not ready for the NBA...

[Skitzle]

It would benefit everyone invovled to have a legitimate minor league system that paid reasonably well and actively developed those not ready for the NBA...

It's called the euro-league.

[Dukiedevil]

I think you could make the opposite case. I strongly suspect (though it'd be next to impossible to obtain proof) that guys like Wall, and many others over the years, simply don't want to be challenged academically like they would be at Duke. They just want to play ball and enjoy the social life of a big time college baller, without the academic responsibilities. If that hypothesis is correct, then athletes like Wall might actually be less likely to come to Duke, where'd they have to do several years of real schoolwork, as opposed to just having to deal with it for one year under the current system.

According to coach Cal, John Wall has the highest GPA on the team, so he must have some interest in his studies. Just because the kid is so talented that it is not in his best interest to go to school for 4 years, does not mean he doesn't care about education or is not intelligent. Kobe and LeBron are both intelligent, but I don't think you will find many people who think it would have been best for them to go to school for 4 years.

[CDu]

According to coach Cal, John Wall has the highest GPA on the team, so he must have some interest in his studies. Just because the kid is so talented that it is not in his best interest to go to school for 4 years, does not mean he doesn't care about education or is not intelligent. Kobe and LeBron are both intelligent, but I don't think you will find many people who think it would have been best for them to go to school for 4 years.

I don't know anything about John Wall's interest in academics, so don't take this as a comment on him in any way. But having the highest GPA doesn't necessarily mean a person has any interest in his studies. These kids don't have identical curricula after all. It could be that one student takes challenging classes while another student takes nothing but P.E. (or similarly rigorous) classes.

Again, I'm not make any statements as to the curriculum Wall is taking. He may be taking a very legitimate schedule and he may very well have a strong interest in his classwork. But the statement by Calipari doesn't really provide any definitive evidence of this (in either direction).

[mgtr]

Amazing how many times the whole one and done subject comes up in this forum. Is there any realistic chance of it changing? Probably not.

[CDu]

Amazing how many times the whole one and done subject comes up in this forum. Is there any realistic chance of it changing? Probably not.

I don't know. Many didn't think they'd change it to the one-and-done format either. If it can change once, it seems like it could change again.

[Dukiedevil]

I don't know anything about John Wall's interest in academics, so don't take this as a comment on him in any way. But having the highest GPA doesn't necessarily mean a person has any interest in his studies. These kids don't have identical curricula after all. It could be that one student takes challenging classes while another student takes nothing but P.E. (or similarly rigorous) classes.

Again, I'm not make any statements as to the curriculum Wall is taking. He may be taking a very legitimate schedule and he may very well have a strong interest in his classwork. But the statement by Calipari doesn't really provide any definitive evidence of this (in either direction).

I agree completely, I just think it is a little presumptuous to think that just because Wall chose UK over Duke does not mean he has no interest in academics.

[Mal]

I agree completely, I just think it is a little presumptuous to think that just because Wall chose UK over Duke does not mean he has no interest in academics.

Agreed. Although, if I can get just a little snarky, having the highest GPA on a John Calipari-coached team at Kentucky is not necessarily strong evidence of a legitimate interest in academics.