Changing the one and done rule

[wiscodevil]

Sorry if this was already posted, but I thought this was an interesting and sound take on things.

http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2010/04/13/proposing-the-kentucky-rule-bench-the-age-floor-make-freshmen/?ncid=txtlnkusspor00000002

any thoughts?

[uh_no]

i thought it was good until he said the one and done rule was racist....

[MarkD83]

A bit of a "nit to pick" the one and done rule does not restrict someone with basketball talent from using their skills professionally. As Brandon Jennings did those that are underage can play in Europe or other places in the world.

That being said I think there are things that the NCAA could do that are in the best interests of the NCAA not the best interests of the NBA.

[Acymetric]

A bit of a "nit to pick" the one and done rule does not restrict someone with basketball talent from using their skills professionally. As Brandon Jennings did those that are underage can play in Europe or other places in the world.

That being said I think there are things that the NCAA could do that are in the best interests of the NCAA not the best interests of the NBA.

What if you changed it to "using their skills professionally in the US" instead?

[UrinalCake]

So on the one hand, he's arguing that 18-year old kids are physically and mentally ready to play in the NBA. On the other hand, he says that they should be prohibited from playing in college until they are older. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. There are a ton of legitimate student-athletes who are capable of playing as freshmen and only a handful of one-and-done'ers, so why punish or drive away all of them?

Also, describing MLB as "majority white" had me rolling on the floor.

[Rich]

I've heard Coach K's thoughts on this topic and agree with them. In a nutshell, there are no restrictions to a player going straight to the pros from high school. But, if a player chooses college then he must stay for at least 2 years. It's fair to the prodigies who want to go straight to the pros and it's "more" fair than the current system to the college game because it gets rid of the "one and done-ers." If there are arguments against this proposal I'd like to hear them.

[RoyalBlue08]

Other than the racist thing, which is a stretch at best, I agree with a lot of what is said in this article. I would be fine with going with a freshman ineligibility rule, at least as a way to force the NBA to change it's rules. I do think they should use the D-leagues to develop players out of high school that aren't interested in college.

[UrinalCake]

I like the two-years-or-none idea. The players who I could see it hurting would be the in-betweeners - guys who are not quite ready straight out of high school, but could be after a single year. Luol Deng and Marvin Williams come to mind. It's a tough decision to put onto an 18 year-old that he has to either declare right away or go to school for two years. Or maybe a guy just blows up after his freshman year and then is stuck having to play in college for another year.

Despite this, I think the advantages brought forth by such a change would outweigh the negatives. If I remember correctly, under the current system if a high school player declares for the draft and then goes undrafted, he is still eligible to play in college. If that rule stays in place then I would imagine a lot of guys would do this, which would add some uncertainty for the college coaches who wouldn't know if they'll have a player until July.

[UrinalCake]

Also you have the issue of agents. If you're going to tell a high school senior that he has to "declare without an agent" in order to preserve the option of going to college, then that puts him in a tough situation. He doesn't have a college coach or sports information office helping him out, so the likelihood of screwing something up seems fairly high.

[Kewlswim]

I like the two-years-or-none idea. The players who I could see it hurting would be the in-betweeners - guys who are not quite ready straight out of high school, but could be after a single year. Luol Deng and Marvin Williams come to mind. .

Hi,

I am not sure I completely agree with this, but let's say Luol really wasn't ready to go to the NBA after a year because his body wasn't strong enough for the pounding he was about to take? So, if he had stayed a second year and matured (physically) in a nurturing environment (Duke) he would have actually been both a better and less injured pro than he has so far?

As an aside, I feel Luol would have stayed had his father not told him to go pro. His father had a birdie whisper in his ear about all the big bucks Luol could make and he wasn't willing to wait. Furthermore, family circumstances (a la Elliot Williams) might have made it so that waiting was not a good option.

GO DUKE!

[DukeAppWV]

I've heard Coach K's thoughts on this topic and agree with them. In a nutshell, there are no restrictions to a player going straight to the pros from high school. But, if a player chooses college then he must stay for at least 2 years. It's fair to the prodigies who want to go straight to the pros and it's "more" fair than the current system to the college game because it gets rid of the "one and done-ers." If there are arguments against this proposal I'd like to hear them.

As a former baseball coach I would love to see the baseball rule used for basketball - All kids are eligible to be drafted after high school - however is said kid attends one college class he is not eligible to be drafted again for 3 years or when he turns 21 - Doubt we will see this, so I say Coach K's plan makes the most practical sense ----

[dukeimac]

Other than the racist thing, which is a stretch at best, I agree with a lot of what is said in this article. I would be fine with going with a freshman ineligibility rule, at least as a way to force the NBA to change it's rules. I do think they should use the D-leagues to develop players out of high school that aren't interested in college.

The D-league is not developing anyone. I have seen this league first hand for three years now. The guys who make it are on the fringe and because they scored a lot in the D-league they get a call. No D-league player has been called up for their defensive presence only because they can hang some points on the board. Even the best rebounders don't get the call unless they can score. That is why the D-league has very few post players, those guys go overseas. Scoring is the key and you don't teach that at this level. You can always tell a D-leaguer that is close to making a pro team. Bring the ball down the court and when they get their hands on it they shot. PGs are the worst, no passes.

The best D-league coach is Quinn.

[mattman91]

im doing a school project on this and i would like all your input. my main argument against it is that if the player thinks he is good enough to go, let him. if it backlashes, its his fault. what do you guys think?

[Big Pappa]

Two points:

First, calling the one and done rule racist may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I am offended that he even said that and to top it all off - the dude is white!

Second, I like the two year rule. It would end up being pretty similar to the NFL rule (3 years after graduation) because many football players red-shirt their freshman, while virtually no (except for injury or academics) basketball players do.

[NSDukeFan]

The D-league is not developing anyone. I have seen this league first hand for three years now. The guys who make it are on the fringe and because they scored a lot in the D-league they get a call. No D-league player has been called up for their defensive presence only because they can hang some points on the board. Even the best rebounders don't get the call unless they can score. That is why the D-league has very few post players, those guys go overseas. Scoring is the key and you don't teach that at this level. You can always tell a D-leaguer that is close to making a pro team. Bring the ball down the court and when they get their hands on it they shot. PGs are the worst, no passes.

The best D-league coach is Quinn.

To me, in the perfect world, the D-league would be a good place for players who are not interested in university, if they are not quite ready for the NBA. Players get paid right away to play and ideally would be able to improve their skills to get to the league. It would be nice if players could return to university, and play, after a year or two if they realized things weren't going well and that they might need an education, though that could also complicate things.

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

I love this D-League idea, although I think so one and dones would still go to college.

[superdave]

Would increasing the rule from one year to two simply increase the # of players going to Europe?