Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 41
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by theAlaskanBear View Post
    Sure, the idea is a long shot...but that doesn't mean there is no chance of it happening.

    I have been a fan of this model since the NBA banned HS players. There is nothing to stop a team from drafting a kid and sending him to Europe or the D-League to get seasoned. It should function a lot more like soccer where NBA franchises can loan out their players to the Euro-leagues. The NBA can also write a salary-cap exception where rookie/draft contracts dont count against the cap until they play in X-number of NBA games...this would encourage them to develop farm teams.

    Also, with many elite players spending 5yrs in highschool (prep school transfers)...age 21 is just two years in school for some of them.
    But there's no need for the NBA to develop a farm system. This is not like baseball, where 40-50 players per team end up in the majors every season. Last season in the NBA, a grand total of 442 players logged minutes. That's less than 15 per team - 12 of whom for each team are on the active roster. There's simply no roster need for a stable of players (none of whom are, at present, NBA-level players) at a minor league level. We've seen this with the D-League to date - very NBA players have come up through the D-League. They're either good enough to stick from the get-go, or they simply aren't good enough.

    Moreover, the developmental needs for basketball players - particularly those of whom are likely to fall within this rule (i.e., those who would, at 18, choose to go pro over at least 3 years of college) - is different than for baseball players. The top 18-21 year-olds are routinely able to contribute to an NBA team immediately, and are drafted for that purpose. That simply is not true of the top 18-21 year-old baseball players, who need multiple years of minor league seasoning before they're ready. And as long as college basketball stays at all viable, there's minimal incentive for NBA teams to develop farm programs, because the colleges do it better and for less ($0) cost to the NBA.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    I think the NBA would be more receptive to a 2-and-done rule: 2 years of college basketball or overseas experience, or 21 years of age. They don't want HS players period. They want evaluable talent. 2 years would give them more than the 1 they get now, and the same players would still be available (at the same salary with a year's more development). College coaches would appreciate it too. Cal wouldn't, of course, but he's not a college coach in any respected sense of that term..

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Tampa
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    But there's no need for the NBA to develop a farm system. This is not like baseball, where 40-50 players per team end up in the majors every season. Last season in the NBA, a grand total of 442 players logged minutes. That's less than 15 per team - 12 of whom for each team are on the active roster. There's simply no roster need for a stable of players (none of whom are, at present, NBA-level players) at a minor league level. We've seen this with the D-League to date - very NBA players have come up through the D-League. They're either good enough to stick from the get-go, or they simply aren't good enough.

    Moreover, the developmental needs for basketball players - particularly those of whom are likely to fall within this rule (i.e., those who would, at 18, choose to go pro over at least 3 years of college) - is different than for baseball players. The top 18-21 year-olds are routinely able to contribute to an NBA team immediately, and are drafted for that purpose. That simply is not true of the top 18-21 year-old baseball players, who need multiple years of minor league seasoning before they're ready. And as long as college basketball stays at all viable, there's minimal incentive for NBA teams to develop farm programs, because the colleges do it better and for less ($0) cost to the NBA.
    What about 15, 16 or 17 year old players? Perhaps an academy-type system like many soccer teams employ would be intriguing to NBA teams. Imagine what the Knicks' money could be used for if they put it toward developing youngsters as opposed to letting AAU "teams" do it. Draft rules would have to change, of course.

    Not that I think any of these ideas will necessarily come to fruition, but the fact that the NBA might like the status quo doesn't mean that they can dictate its continuation indefinitely, particularly as other threats (most notably, the overseas leagues) continue to innovate.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by TampaDuke View Post
    What about 15, 16 or 17 year old players? Perhaps an academy-type system like many soccer teams employ would be intriguing to NBA teams. Imagine what the Knicks' money could be used for if they put it toward developing youngsters as opposed to letting AAU "teams" do it. Draft rules would have to change, of course.

    Not that I think any of these ideas will necessarily come to fruition, but the fact that the NBA might like the status quo doesn't mean that they can dictate its continuation indefinitely, particularly as other threats (most notably, the overseas leagues) continue to innovate.
    Well, if we're talking about a minor/ developmental league that cover hs age kids, that would be a different story. I'm not sure where I sit on taking 15 year olds and putting them in professional training programs. But that has nothing to do with the baseball-style eligibility rules being discussed here. And as far as the NBA is concerned, taking on a full minor league of 18-22 year olds is a very different story, and not something that seems in its best interests as long as college basketball is viable.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  5. #25
    If the NCAA wanted to make the system fairer, they would allow athletes to sign agents, play in summer leagues, promote products, and enter the drafts (plural -- it's a global talent market after all).

    I don't care how good a player is, I don't want to invest my support in a player that is not investing back to the school.
    In what way does a college sophomore playing for his varsity basketball team -- on the university's dime -- count as "investing in the school?"

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Berg View Post
    If the NCAA wanted to make the system fairer, they would allow athletes to sign agents, play in summer leagues, promote products, and enter the drafts (plural -- it's a global talent market after all).


    In what way does a college sophomore playing for his varsity basketball team -- on the university's dime -- count as "investing in the school?"
    When a player states up front that he does not intend to be there for more than one year, that is to me is not an investment. It's only an opinion, but it's mine and it's how I feel. As I stated in the same post that you quoted, it will be very hard to be a fan of a player knowing that I will only be able to be a fan for a short period of time. If you look back at the players we have, or just graduated, would you not say that Scheyer, Smith, Singler, Thomas and Zoubs invested themselves in Duke? I feel that even Elton Brand, who only played for two years, invested himself in the school. Like I said, it's only an opinion, but it's mine.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    Well, if we're talking about a minor/ developmental league that cover hs age kids, that would be a different story. I'm not sure where I sit on taking 15 year olds and putting them in professional training programs. But that has nothing to do with the baseball-style eligibility rules being discussed here. And as far as the NBA is concerned, taking on a full minor league of 18-22 year olds is a very different story, and not something that seems in its best interests as long as college basketball is viable.
    I agree, college functions as the de facto minor league system, and the NBA should be protecting that as much as possible because a) colleges foot the $$$ bills for training/housing/coaching these young men and b) the great ones arrive in the NBA with a fanbase and media exposure.

    Hopefully, the NBA and NCAA can work out an agreement that is a little bit better than the one and done.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    . . . colleges foot the $$$ bills for training/housing/coaching these young men
    I am not singling out or criticizing one of our esteemed members. However, please note the “Freudian slip” here. Unmentioned in the delineation of financial benefits provided is the entire academic element of scholarships: tuition, fees, books, and so forth. Can there be any doubt that revenue-sport “student athletes” are often perceived and “semi-pros” first, and serious undergraduates second? That is most regrettable.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    I am not singling out or criticizing one of our esteemed members. However, please note the “Freudian slip” here. Unmentioned in the delineation of financial benefits provided is the entire academic element of scholarships: tuition, fees, books, and so forth. Can there be any doubt that revenue-sport “student athletes” are often perceived and “semi-pros” first, and serious undergraduates second? That is most regrettable.
    Regrettable, yes, but also an understandable statement. I fully support the academic endeavors of all student-athletes, but in elite programs like Duke, I bet most of the players themselves would consider themselves semi-pros. You don't have too many starting players coming to Duke who are NOT looking 1-2-3 years down the road and envisioning themselves in the NBA.

    But more to the point -- my post solely concerned the relationship between the NCAA and NBA -- and presumably the NBA did not insert the 1-and-done rule to make players go to classes and get an education, but rather to improve their skills and mature physically.

    Maybe is it sacrilegious to claim that colleges are the semi-pro league to the NBA, but it is the de facto reality. Heck, I could even make the case that some schools should treat their basketball players MORE like pros, because the purpose of a college education is preparing for your life beyond college -- this is why specialized sports degrees in contracts/finances/marketing/pr, etc. should be offered.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by theAlaskanBear View Post
    this is why specialized sports degrees in contracts/finances/marketing/pr, etc. should be offered.
    Not a bad idea given the high number of NBA players who are completely broke a short time after their careers end.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  11. #31
    When a player states up front that he does not intend to be there for more than one year, that is to me is not an investment.
    Just curious, what all counts as an investment? Going to class? Playing a non-revenue sport? Donating to the Annual Fund? Joining a sorority? Taking a work-study job at the library?

    Not being snarky. I'm honestly not sure where you're going with this concept.

  12. #32
    Maybe is it sacrilegious to claim that colleges are the semi-pro league to the NBA, but it is the de facto reality. Heck, I could even make the case that some schools should treat their basketball players MORE like pros, because the purpose of a college education is preparing for your life beyond college -- this is why specialized sports degrees in contracts/finances/marketing/pr, etc. should be offered.
    I agree in principle, but the practicalities don't work. The media hype directed at John Wall types makes us forget: 99% of student athletes will never play in the NBA. You can't field a new department or certificate program from a half-dozen potential students. (it would be open to non-athletes, of course, but you also have to remember that guys like Battier or Horvath would remain free to pursue subjects they find more interesting)

    In any case, I don't mind the "semi-pro" treatment, as long as:
    (1) the NBA-track players are treated right. the current system is full of obnoxious rules, some of them downright unfair
    (2) even if their presence is primarily about basketball, it's a net benefit to the rest of the university community & its academic mission. positive branding is nice; contributing toward the general budget would be even nicer! (right now it's my understanding that the Athletic Dept receives funding from the Allen Building, not the other way around, despite their massive revenues)

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Berg View Post
    Just curious, what all counts as an investment? Going to class? Playing a non-revenue sport? Donating to the Annual Fund? Joining a sorority? Taking a work-study job at the library?

    Not being snarky. I'm honestly not sure where you're going with this concept.
    I think those players who come to Duke with the intention of staying at Duke (at least for a couple of years) become more than just student-athletes. To me (and I'm sure to the school's administration) they become ambassadors for the school and to the local community. They commit their time and effort beyond what happens on the court and in the classroom. They learn the values that K teaches them, and share those values later. I don't view someone who comes in with the intention of only staying one year as an ambassador to anything, other than their self-serving needs. Obviously the one and doner has to go to school somewhere, I'd just rather it be to another school, like Kentucky. Calipari can have all of them for all I care.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by 4decadedukie View Post
    Can there be any doubt that revenue-sport “student athletes” are often perceived and “semi-pros” first, and serious undergraduates second? That is most regrettable.
    Is your problem that there aren't competitive minor leagues for players to join for football and basketball, or is it that college sports generate revenue? In other words: do you have a problem with minor league baseball, or do you have a problem with collegiate athletics?

    How many pre-med students are simply "semi-pro" doctors? How many engineering students are future engineers? Is your problem that just because some student-athletes' future profession is an extracurricular and is one associated with celebrity? I don't find it sad, necessarily, that players don't graduate; I find it more sad that a degree doesn't offer a compelling reason for players to even go to class (like Kentucky).

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    I think those players who come to Duke with the intention of staying at Duke (at least for a couple of years) become more than just student-athletes. To me (and I'm sure to the school's administration) they become ambassadors for the school and to the local community. They commit their time and effort beyond what happens on the court and in the classroom. They learn the values that K teaches them, and share those values later. I don't view someone who comes in with the intention of only staying one year as an ambassador to anything, other than their self-serving needs. Obviously the one and doner has to go to school somewhere, I'd just rather it be to another school, like Kentucky. Calipari can have all of them for all I care.
    You do realize that someone who comes to a school - any school - with the intention of staying for just one year can, nonetheless, "commit their time and effort beyond ... the court and ... classroom," "learn the values that [coaches and others] teach them and share those values later," and act, during that year, as an "ambassador[] for the school and to the local community," right? And that someone who comes and stays for four years can nonetheless pursue nothing but "self-serving needs" throughout their career, not getting involved with anything outside of the gym or the classroom and forgetting about their school the second they get their degree? The comparisons you're drawing are not at all mutually exclusive. You're painting with a broad brush here and attributing intentions to a class of individuals - avowed one-and-doners - that I'm not sure have done anything to merit them.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    You're painting with a broad brush here and attributing intentions to a class of individuals - avowed one-and-doners - that I'm not sure have done anything to merit them.
    Sigh. I can only state my opinion so many times, so I'm done. I know it's not a popular one, but I've never been much of a conformist anyway. It's just how I feel. At least you have taken the time to debate, I appreciate that. Unlike the person who gave the negative response to my first comment as "embarrasing and judgemental". I don't see where it was judgemental, and it didn't embarrass me a bit, that's why I wrote it. I invite whoever that was to come actually back their thoughts up like some of the others here have. Nobody is wrong, but if you have an opinion at least state it openly.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    Sigh. I can only state my opinion so many times, so I'm done. I know it's not a popular one, but I've never been much of a conformist anyway. It's just how I feel. At least you have taken the time to debate, I appreciate that. Unlike the person who gave the negative response to my first comment as "embarrasing and judgemental". I don't see where it was judgemental, and it didn't embarrass me a bit, that's why I wrote it. I invite whoever that was to come actually back their thoughts up like some of the others here have. Nobody is wrong, but if you have an opinion at least state it openly.
    My point of view comes from a (perhaps naive) streak of incurable optimism; simply put, I presume the best in people until they show me otherwise. For that reason, I assume that even if, for example, Austin Rivers comes to Duke with the stated goal of leaving for the NBA after one season, during his time at Duke he will fully commit to his role as a representative of the University, a student on campus, and a member of the team. If he comes and behaves differently, so be it. I'll be disappointed. But I'd much rather assume the best intentions out of the kid than assume the worst.* And I feel at least somewhat bolstered in my assumption by the fact that Coach K is pretty darn good about getting kids to "unpack their bags," so to speak, even if it's only for a short period of time.


    *I don't mean to say that you're necessarily assuming the worst.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
    The one thing we can (might) all agree on is that the one and done rule blatantly undermines the intent of our so called institutions of higher learning. A kid can come in and flunk out completely while staying eligible to play ball. A two-year rule would at least force some level of academic performance, and therefore at least some investment by the young man. The current system is a farce, and should embarrass everyone associated with any university. I know it's all about money, and the days of money and integrity coexisting are gone forever. I guess I've become old and cranky.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Reddevil View Post
    The one thing we can (might) all agree on is that the one and done rule blatantly undermines the intent of our so called institutions of higher learning. A kid can come in and flunk out completely while staying eligible to play ball. A two-year rule would at least force some level of academic performance, and therefore at least some investment by the young man. The current system is a farce, and should embarrass everyone associated with any university. I know it's all about money, and the days of money and integrity coexisting are gone forever. I guess I've become old and cranky.
    I agree 100%. If you are old and cranky, then I am your young and cranky counterpart.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by toooskies View Post
    Is your problem that there aren't competitive minor leagues for players to join for football and basketball, or is it that college sports generate revenue? In other words: do you have a problem with minor league baseball, or do you have a problem with collegiate athletics?

    How many pre-med students are simply "semi-pro" doctors? How many engineering students are future engineers? Is your problem that just because some student-athletes' future profession is an extracurricular and is one associated with celebrity? I don't find it sad, necessarily, that players don't graduate; I find it more sad that a degree doesn't offer a compelling reason for players to even go to class (like Kentucky).

    First, toooskies, I don't have a problem; rather, the current collegiate athletic system has some serious issues (several recent DBR threads consider this at length, and I have delineated my position re the NCAA and potential improvements in these discussions).

    Additionally, with this said, my concern is that there are only limited "seats" at reputable universities, and attendance is MUCH more constrained at the few elite higher educational institutions (certainly including Duke). Therefore, any individual who is not seriously committed to scholastic endeavors simply should not occupy one of those coveted positions. This absolutely does not suggest that one's academic-focus need be all-consuming -- a balance among undergraduate social, athletic, service, scholarship, and other activities is ideal -- however, to use a prominent example, this year's crop of Calipari/UK "one and dones" (several of whom purportedly never attended second semester classes) plainly do not belong at a university, even a mediocre one. How many qualified and committed Kentucky high school students were denied admission to UK so Cal's academically pathetic and disinterested "one and dones" could attend (recognizing that Wall, at least, was a reasonable freshman academically)? If your child failed to be admitted to UK so a "one and done" could use his freshman year only to promote an NBA career, would you feel that was reasonable or fair?

    Further, you ask "How many pre-med students are simply 'semi-pro' doctors? How many engineering students are future engineers?". The obvious answer is "lots," but I suspect you miss the essential, overriding point. Universities fundamentally exist to promote scholarship, learning and research, with intercollegiate athletics only as a secondary mission. Reading Duke's indenture, among countless other documents, makes this abundantly clear. Thus, it is perfectly appropriate that the pre-med or engineering undergraduate are future professionals in those fields; however, the same is not true with athletes, because the primary, documented, and indisputably acknowledged (for many centuries) purpose of universities is academic (and ethical) preparation, not semi-pro sports.
    Last edited by 4decadedukie; 08-20-2010 at 08:34 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. NBA Pre-Draft Measurements (Draft Express)
    By slower in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-03-2010, 07:31 PM
  2. Potential ACC Tiebreakers
    By Olympic Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 03-08-2010, 01:07 PM
  3. Potential Draft Moves and an Old Duke Myth
    By Jaymf7 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-27-2008, 10:35 AM
  4. Potential new revenue for DBR?
    By dukemomLA in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 11:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •