NBA Draft Rule -- What should it be?

[MChambers]

Maybe I shouldn't start this thread, since the season has one more game, but we're already discussing who is going pro, so here goes:

What should the rule be about players going to the NBA? I see four basic options:

1. The one year of college rule, which we now have. Benefit is that it keeps many kids from trying to go directly from high school to the NBA who aren't ready. (See Brown, Kwame. Note that it is nice, however, that Michael Jordan had such a historically bad #1 pick as GM.) Downsides: you have kids going to school taking classes in Athletics and Masculinity for a semester, then skipping classes in the spring. Also, you keep players like Oden and James out of the NBA, when they clearly are ready.

2. Two years of college. Someone here said Stern wants that, but Jumbo says it is unlikely and at least several years off. Not sure how it is better than #1.

3. No limit (the old rule.)

4. Give players some sort of credit for college, by adjusting the length of the rookie salary cap for players who play college ball. Allows the Odens and James to go directly to the NBA, while giving the Battiers some credit for their college years.

Feel free to suggest other options.

[Channing]

I personally would like to see the Baseball rule. Option to go pro out of high school, but you must wait three years if you attend college.

This allows those who feel they are ready and want to go straight out of high school. At the same time, it prevents kids from going to college and making a mockery of the academic system (theoretically). If there is a three year requirement, the "student" part of student athlete can't be thrown to the wind. A kid would still have to take classes and make passing grades to remain eligible.

[jjasper0729]

I agree with the Vitale opinion on this one. Do basketball the same way they do baseball. Everyone is eligible for the draft out of high school. If you're drafted and go, no college, if you're drafted and don't like where, you can go to college (presuming you don't get an agent) but have to stay there for 3 years. if you're not drafted, you can go to college and have to stay at least 3 years in college before you're eligible for the draft again.

[jjasper0729]

the big downside to this is the recruiting obviously... but people, if they're smart, can adjust to it.

[eddiehaskell]

I'd like to see them stay atleast 2 years.

[JasonEvans]

The baseball rule is clearly the best way to do it. Not even a close call.

All other ideas are either really unfair to the kids or really unfair to the schools.

-Jason "I like everyone being elligible for the draft too-- let NBA teams sweat if the kid they pick is going to turn pro or go to school" Evans

[MChambers]

The baseball rule is clearly the best way to do it. Not even a close call.

All other ideas are either really unfair to the kids or really unfair to the schools.

-Jason "I like everyone being elligible for the draft too-- let NBA teams sweat if the kid they pick is going to turn pro or go to school" Evans

Why would #4 be really unfair to the kids or the schools?

[jjasper0729]

part of th eproblem too, as I see it, is the rookie salary scale. If I remember, the intention of it was to lock the amount and time for the first contract in. The theory was that the high schoolers wouldn't be able to get the outrageous contracts that were being provided to draft picks (like glenn robinson or kevin garnett) who left early or jumped straight from HS, so they'd go to college, get seasoned and get better that way. Unfortunately, the law of unintended consequences hit and the HS players flocked to the draft to get the first contract, start the clock and then use the second contract to get the big pay off.

I actually think it would be better to go back to no rookie pay scale. This would make the teams evaluate talent better and more than likely go with someone that has proven ability and talent rather than take someone on potential. If you combine that, with the baseball method, it might reduce the volatility of it all. You'll still get kids that have hangers-on that tell them they are the greatest thing since sliced bread but that would probably be the minority.

Anyway, tha'ts my $0.02.

[Matches]

I like the baseball option too. If a kid right out of high school is ready for the NBA (or thinks he is), and wants to make a go of it - more power to him. I dislike the notion of using a college as a one-year stopping point with no intention of graduating. IMO that makes a mockery of the "student" half of "student-athlete".

[Jumbo]

The baseball rule is clearly the best way to do it. Not even a close call.

All other ideas are either really unfair to the kids or really unfair to the schools.

-Jason "I like everyone being elligible for the draft too-- let NBA teams sweat if the kid they pick is going to turn pro or go to school" Evans

I like the baseball rule as well, but you also need a fully functioning NBDL to make it work. The bottom line for me is that the NBA rule should be about whatever is best for the NBA. Period.

I've said this before, but I'd enjoy Duke hoops just as much if we were watching D-III caliber players, as long as the rest of the nation worked the same way and we were watching true student-athletes.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

The baseball rule is clearly the best way to do it. Not even a close call.

All other ideas are either really unfair to the kids or really unfair to the schools.

-Jason "I like everyone being elligible for the draft too-- let NBA teams sweat if the kid they pick is going to turn pro or go to school" Evans

I agree with Jason (and others) who favor the baseball rule. Some kids take the money and sit in the minors for years (and never make it), others make the jump to the show fairly quickly. Others, like the big center/pitcher from NC State whose name escapes me) who opted not to play bball his junior year for fear of injury, hurt his throwing shoulder anyway, got drafted by the Yankees and now is on the DL for the second straight year. At least he's got 3 years of college to fall back on (and his money from the Yankees) if he never pitches in another game. That would be a shame for him, but he can go back to State and get his degree.

Shortening the "rookie contract length" for kids who go to college makes some sense.

[JasonEvans]

Why would #4 be really unfair to the kids or the schools?

Sorry, I was not addressing that one. I do like the notion of a sliding pay scale for experience as it woudl appear more likely that a more experienced player will be able to contribute right away.

--Jason "I do worry that if the compensation is too large, that rule may discourage teams from taking seniors versus less experienced players" Evans

[Jumbo]

I agree with Jason (and others) who favor the baseball rule. Some kids take the money and sit in the minors for years (and never make it), others make the jump to the show fairly quickly. Others, like the big center/pitcher from NC State whose name escapes me) who opted not to play bball his junior year for fear of injury, hurt his throwing shoulder anyway, got drafted by the Yankees and now is on the DL for the second straight year. At least he's got 3 years of college to fall back on (and his money from the Yankees) if he never pitches in another game. That would be a shame for him, but he can go back to State and get his degree.

Shortening the "rookie contract length" for kids who go to college makes some sense.

You're thinking of Andrew Brackman. The Yankees drafted him knowing he needed Tommy John surgery, so the "DL for the second straight year" thing is misleading. TJ surgery generally takes about 1.5 years for a full recovery. Brackman is very much in the Yankees' future plans.

[Duvall]

The baseball rule is clearly the best way to do it. Not even a close call.

All other ideas are either really unfair to the kids or really unfair to the schools.

Which is why it will never happen - the NBA, in conjunction with the players, are the only ones who get to set the rules, and they'll do what's best for them.

[MChambers]

Which is why it will never happen - the NBA, in conjunction with the players, are the only ones who get to set the rules, and they'll do what's best for them.

I've never understood why the players' union was opposed to limits on players going directly to the NBA. Wouldn't the players in the union today want to restrict competition?

[MChambers]

part of th eproblem too, as I see it, is the rookie salary scale. If I remember, the intention of it was to lock the amount and time for the first contract in. The theory was that the high schoolers wouldn't be able to get the outrageous contracts that were being provided to draft picks (like glenn robinson or kevin garnett) who left early or jumped straight from HS, so they'd go to college, get seasoned and get better that way. Unfortunately, the law of unintended consequences hit and the HS players flocked to the draft to get the first contract, start the clock and then use the second contract to get the big pay off.

I actually think it would be better to go back to no rookie pay scale. This would make the teams evaluate talent better and more than likely go with someone that has proven ability and talent rather than take someone on potential. If you combine that, with the baseball method, it might reduce the volatility of it all. You'll still get kids that have hangers-on that tell them they are the greatest thing since sliced bread but that would probably be the minority.

Anyway, tha'ts my $0.02.

Seems like the rookie salary cap has some perverse effects. It encourages players to go pro early, to burn off the cap, and it encourages teams to take a chance on young, unproven players.

[Karl Beem]

I've never understood why the players' union was opposed to limits on players going directly to the NBA. Wouldn't the players in the union today want to restrict competition?

They're doing what their agents want.

[RelativeWays]

The NBA needs to do something because the quality of the product has suffered from the talent pool being diluted (too many teams) and now the over saturation of young players drafted on pure potential, not experience. The young players are really making themselves more disposable when every year you have a crop of 6'6 -6'8 any position players thats have loads of potential, but they are getting less and less time to develop that potential. There are a lot of college stars who played in the NBA as great role players, Danny Ferry was one. I'm not sure he gets his chance to come off the bench for either Cleveland or SA in today's NBA. He's be out in 2-4 years. At the very least, there needs to be a 2 year wait if you go to college. The ones who are really ready to go have maxed out their college game by then anyway.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

You're thinking of Andrew Brackman. The Yankees drafted him knowing he needed Tommy John surgery, so the "DL for the second straight year" thing is misleading. TJ surgery generally takes about 1.5 years for a full recovery. Brackman is very much in the Yankees' future plans.

Yup, Brackman. I thought (as a Yankee fan) that Brackman would be back this year in the minors. I believe they put him on the 60 day DL. I think putting him on the DL is a 40-man or perhaps 60-man roster move (is there a 60 man roster?), as players on the DL frequently have rehab stints in AA or AAA before returning to the active roster.

Thanks Jumbo.

[Kdogg]

part of th eproblem too, as I see it, is the rookie salary scale. If I remember, the intention of it was to lock the amount and time for the first contract in. The theory was that the high schoolers wouldn't be able to get the outrageous contracts that were being provided to draft picks (like glenn robinson or kevin garnett) who left early or jumped straight from HS, so they'd go to college, get seasoned and get better that way. Unfortunately, the law of unintended consequences hit and the HS players flocked to the draft to get the first contract, start the clock and then use the second contract to get the big pay off.

I actually think it would be better to go back to no rookie pay scale. This would make the teams evaluate talent better and more than likely go with someone that has proven ability and talent rather than take someone on potential. If you combine that, with the baseball method, it might reduce the volatility of it all. You'll still get kids that have hangers-on that tell them they are the greatest thing since sliced bread but that would probably be the minority.

Anyway, tha'ts my $0.02.

The rookie salary scale was a way to protect the owners from themselves. It will never disappear. IMHO, Glen Robinson was the catalyst not because he left college early, but because of his demands. He was a great college player but he wanted an unprecedented 13 year, $100 million dollar contract as a rookie. At the time the Bucks were not even worth $100 million. The Bucks eventually negotiated a 10-year, $68 million deal. It didn't matter that he left early. The owners didn't like the power play and the domino effect on veterans' contracts. Garnett's rookie contract by comparison was reasonable. Garnett's second contract combined with Glen's rookie contract lead to the lockout which gave us the rookie scale and max length/value contracts.

You can not get rid of the rookie scale without getting rid of the max length/value contracts (which will never happen). The limits on the length of the contract encourage players to leave early. They also mitigate bad draft choices for teams. Teams can take more chances knowing they will not be out tens of millions of dollars.

[jjasper0729]

but the unintended consequence was that more underclassmen/high-schoolers jumped to get the clock started to get into the second contract sooner. i will concede that it was to negate the power plays/hold outs for the rookie contracts. but now, the owners know what they have to pay so they can take potential for "later" rather than a known commodity that might can help right away.

either way, i don't watch the nba anyway.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

What about the baseball rule but w/ only a 2 year requirement?

[BCGroup]

According to the blog over on the N and O:
" NCAA president Myles Brand and NBA commissioner David Stern are holding a press conference here on Monday and are expected to announce a change in the NBA's draft eligibility policy.

Brand hinted Thursday the NCAA and NBA had worked out a deal to create a 20-year-old age limit, which would keep the best players in college for a minimum of two years."


http://blogs.newsobserver.com/accnow/index.php?title=two_year_rule_expected_from_nba_nc aa&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

[eddiehaskell]

I hope it happens! Imagine getting to see the next Kobe, James or Garnett play college ball for 2 years. :D

[geraldsneighbor]

I personally would like to see the Baseball rule. Option to go pro out of high school, but you must wait three years if you attend college.

This allows those who feel they are ready and want to go straight out of high school. At the same time, it prevents kids from going to college and making a mockery of the academic system (theoretically). If there is a three year requirement, the "student" part of student athlete can't be thrown to the wind. A kid would still have to take classes and make passing grades to remain eligible.


I couldn't agreee with you more. I look at it from the stand-point, who becides the NBA is helped by the Beasley's of the worlds playing one year in college. Three years allows enough time for the player to develop while working towards a degree. One year is the kid using a scholarship and not going to class and playing basketball. Plus, Beasley, Mayo, Oden didn't even want to go to college. If they're ready out of high school, let them make the decision. Its their life. The current set-up can F up some programs.

[K24U]

Baseball rule all the way.

[jimsumner]

Unless I completely misunderstand the way this works, Myles Brand and David Stern can't do anything without the approval of the NBA Players Association and the CBA isn't up for renewal until 2011.

Comparing major league baseball and the NBA is like comparing apples and oranges. MLB doesn't draft players out of high school--even college in most cases--with the expectation that they will move directly into the majors. But MLB has a huge infrastructure in place to move 18-year-olds up the food chain. And it's very Darwinian. Most never make it.

But they don't draft 18-year-olds, cut them in spring training, and leave them floundering. The NBA, by contrast, has nothing remotely comparable to the huge and battle-tested minor league universe. Under the why-don't-we-try-the-baseball-system, I see tons of overly ambitious prepsters declaring for the draft with no chance of making an NBA team and then drifting off the face of the planet.

Plus, I would like to hear from a lawyer on this but I'm not sure this would hold up in court. MLB is immune from anti-trust legislation, the NBA is not. So, I can't see how any of this would work if it's not a by-product of the collective-bargaining process between the NBA and the NBA Players Association.

The NBA cares about the NCAA only in the sense that they have a great feeder system that doesn't cost them a red cent. The NCAA gives the NBA what minor-league-baseball-gives MLB, only NBA teams don't have to support a half-dozen minor-league franchises. So, the NBA will only tweak the system so far and make no mistake, the NBA is the driving force in all this.

[MIKESJ73]

If there is an agreement announced today, how will this effect players on the fence? With 10-12 freshman leaving this year and 0 next year, next years draft could be very weak. Tyler may move into the top 5-10 in next years draft with no freshman and only about a third of the sophmores qualifying. Also more freshman may make the jump this year if they have to wait two more years before entering the draft.

[JasonEvans]

According to the blog over on the N and O:
" NCAA president Myles Brand and NBA commissioner David Stern are holding a press conference here on Monday and are expected to announce a change in the NBA's draft eligibility policy.

Brand hinted Thursday the NCAA and NBA had worked out a deal to create a 20-year-old age limit, which would keep the best players in college for a minimum of two years."


http://blogs.newsobserver.com/accnow/index.php?title=two_year_rule_expected_from_nba_nc aa&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Depending on how the 20-year-old limit was set up, this would still allow a lot of college freshmen to declare for the draft. Lots of kids take an extra year of high school/prep school and often arrive in college at 19.

For example, Kyle Singler was born on May 4, 1988. He will be 20 before this year's NBA draft.

--Jason "this rule would keep Beasley in school another year and Derrick Rose too" Evans

[SoCalDukeFan]

The NBA only cares about the NBA. With the one and done rule college bball showcases the best players and also points out some duds so the NBA makes less draft mistakes. Of course the players who enter college intending to be one and done are in only a rare case "student athletes."

The baseball rule with a two years might be the way to go. At least the players who intend to be two and done will have to achieve some academic standard to be eligible. Those with no intention of being a student can go directly to the NBA.

The big problem for the NCAA is that they are helpless. The NBA can do what it wants. Maybe the NCAA should say that freshmen will not be eligible for varsity basketball unless the NBA adopts the baseball rule or some version of it.

SoCal

[Bluedawg]

I personally would like to see the Baseball rule. Option to go pro out of high school, but you must wait three years if you attend college.

This allows those who feel they are ready and want to go straight out of high school. At the same time, it prevents kids from going to college and making a mockery of the academic system (theoretically). If there is a three year requirement, the "student" part of student athlete can't be thrown to the wind. A kid would still have to take classes and make passing grades to remain eligible.

But how many kids go from HS to MLB? Most of them spend time in the minors before going up. They have a system to prepare the kids for the highest professional level.

I prefer the NFL rule which is 3 years out of HS.

[Kdogg]

Unless I completely misunderstand the way this works, Myles Brand and David Stern can't do anything without the approval of the NBA Players Association and the CBA isn't up for renewal until 2011.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Plus, I haven't seen the big news service report anything.



But they don't draft 18-year-olds, cut them in spring training, and leave them floundering. The NBA, by contrast, has nothing remotely comparable to the huge and battle-tested minor league universe. Under the why-don't-we-try-the-baseball-system, I see tons of overly ambitious prepsters declaring for the draft with no chance of making an NBA team and then drifting off the face of the planet.

Isn't that Darwin at work? The NDBL is not a mature farm system but it is a start. It will never be the feeder that college ball is though.