PDA

View Full Version : Is 7 weeks too long?



Bluedawg
05-27-2008, 07:47 AM
With the current format for underclassmen to declare for the NBA Draft NCAA coaches have to wait 7 weeks to see if their star players will return. Some coaches feel that too long.


"Everybody wants these young men to have opportunities; we don't want to take that away," N.C. State coach Sidney Lowe said. "But the timetable between when they declare and when they pull out is just too long, because you don't know if they're coming back. ... That's not fair to the next kid you're trying to recruit, to their teammates. ... "

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1086230.html

Opinions? is it too long a wait? Is the wait soo long that it could hurt the player?

Then there are those like Oliver Purnell who wants to at least partially eliminate the waiting period all together.


To cut down on the uncertainty, Purnell is in favor of a baseball-style rule that would force players to go straight to the NBA out of high school, or stay in college at least three years.

"If you're ready, you're not denied the opportunity to go pro,...''

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1086230.html[/

I guess he is looking at an either or. Either you go pro right out of HS, or you wait 3 years if you sign with a college team.

Now, i don't follow the NBA, so i need help with this one. How many players go pro right out of HS and contribute as compared to how many play college ball for 2-3 years, go pro and contribute? How many HS players go pro, sit for 3-4 years before getting any real PT?

Does Purnell have a point?

Bob Green
05-28-2008, 05:43 AM
Does Purnell have a point?

I agree with Coach Purnell. IMO, one and done players are not good for college basketball over the long run. Those who are ready (Beasley/Rose) should be allowed to go straight to the NBA and those who accept a scholarship to become student-athletes should be required to stay a minimum of three years.

As for the seven weeks between a player announcing and having to pull his name, I believe it should be eliminated all together. If a player declares for the NBA Draft, he should be finished as a college player.

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 08:38 AM
I agree with Coach Purnell. IMO, one and done players are not good for college basketball over the long run. Those who are ready (Beasley/Rose) should be allowed to go straight to the NBA and those who accept a scholarship to become student-athletes should be required to stay a minimum of three years.

But how many of those who actually make the jump get PT their first 3 years? And if a HS player can compete in the NBA what does that say for the talent level of the NBA?


As for the seven weeks between a player announcing and having to pull his name, I believe it should be eliminated all together. If a player declares for the NBA Draft, he should be finished as a college player.

I agree. I hate the back door. Make them fish or cut bate.

Hickson not at camp NCSU freshman didn't make list (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1087522.html)

Where does this leave JJ?

MIKESJ73
05-28-2008, 08:57 AM
Does a MLB team retain the rights of a player it drafts out of high school if the player plays college ball? It would be most beneficial for both the NBA teams and the players if a team was allowed to draft a players rights, then allow them to play in the NCAA in my opinion. A player that most likely wouldn't contribute in the first couple of years in the NBA could get the opportunity to see court time at the NCAA level, then after three years go on to the NBA with a better chance to contribute. The main problem would be when a players' performance in college doesn't live up to the expectations (Shav?) and the NBA team is forced to give a three year contract. The NBA might stop drafting younger players and waiting to see how they pan out in college or they might start drafting the rights of high school underclassmen, it would be interesting.

Jumbo
05-28-2008, 09:01 AM
And if a HS player can compete in the NBA what does that say for the talent level of the NBA?

If Rafael Nadal can win the French Open at age 18, what does that say for the talent level in tennis?

If Sidney Crosby can lead the Penguins to the Stanley Cup Finals at age 20, what does that say for the talent level of the NHL?

If Dwight Gooden could win 17 games at age 19, what does that say for the talent level of Major League Baseball? (Or, more recently, if Felix Hernandez could post a 2.67 ERA and strike out 77 guys in 84.1 innings at 19...)

If Mike Tyson could be come heavyweight champion at 20, what does that say about the talent level in boxing?

I can keep going. I think you've probably noticed the trend by now.

alteran
05-28-2008, 09:05 AM
I agree with Coach Purnell. IMO, one and done players are not good for college basketball over the long run. Those who are ready (Beasley/Rose) should be allowed to go straight to the NBA and those who accept a scholarship to become student-athletes should be required to stay a minimum of three years.

As for the seven weeks between a player announcing and having to pull his name, I believe it should be eliminated all together. If a player declares for the NBA Draft, he should be finished as a college player.

I used to be against this, now I'm more on the fence.

When I was against it, it was because basketball players didn't have a real alternative to college (I don't think going overseas counts). With the NBDL, players aren't forced to go to college to advance their bball careers.

I worry a little that such an arrangement might be one of those "too clever by half" things. NCAA bball is a big deal. College baseball is not. How much of that is because the best baseball players opt to go the minors route?

Who knows? But if we try it this way, we'll definitely find out.

tbyers11
05-28-2008, 09:48 AM
Hickson not at camp NCSU freshman didn't make list (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1087522.html)

Where does this leave JJ?

Most mock drafts have Hickson (I can't refer to him as just JJ, that's reserved) right at the first round cut-off line. The N&O article says that he wasn't planning on working out at Orlando, but just wanted to take the physical. However, there are only 15 physical-only slots at the camp. Most of the players on the workout list (http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3413496&name=katz_andy&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fesp n%2fblog%2findex%3fentryID%3d3413496%26name%3dkatz _andy) are 2nd round to undrafted types.

My take is that Hickson seems to be rated a cut above the players working out at Orlando, but is not a top 20 lock. I think he will be picked somewhere between 25-35 if he stays in. If that is good enough for him, I don't know. But, if I had to bet, I don't think we will see him in Raleigh next year.

sagegrouse
05-28-2008, 10:19 AM
If Rafael Nadal can win the French Open at age 18, what does that say for the talent level in tennis?

If Sidney Crosby can lead the Penguins to the Stanley Cup Finals at age 20, what does that say for the talent level of the NHL?

If Dwight Gooden could win 17 games at age 19, what does that say for the talent level of Major League Baseball? (Or, more recently, if Felix Hernandez could post a 2.67 ERA and strike out 77 guys in 84.1 innings at 19...)

If Mike Tyson could be come heavyweight champion at 20, what does that say about the talent level in boxing?

I can keep going. I think you've probably noticed the trend by now.

And if sagegrouse can be the most brilliant poster on DBR at age 65, what does that say about the talent level here?

sagegrouse

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 10:49 AM
If Rafael Nadal can win the French Open at age 18, what does that say for the talent level in tennis?

If Sidney Crosby can lead the Penguins to the Stanley Cup Finals at age 20, what does that say for the talent level of the NHL?

If Dwight Gooden could win 17 games at age 19, what does that say for the talent level of Major League Baseball? (Or, more recently, if Felix Hernandez could post a 2.67 ERA and strike out 77 guys in 84.1 innings at 19...)

If Mike Tyson could be come heavyweight champion at 20, what does that say about the talent level in boxing?

I can keep going. I think you've probably noticed the trend by now.

Yes I do and there will always be phenoms, but I'm asking generally and universally. Plus, it doesn't answer my question...it just expands it. is the talent level in American sports dropping?

As far as Boxing the answer is yes...which is why there is a thread on this board asking if Boxing can be saved.

Jumbo
05-28-2008, 10:53 AM
Yes I do and there will always be phenoms, but I'm asking generally and universally. Plus, it doesn't answer my question...it just expands it. is the talent level in American sports dropping?

As far as Boxing the answer is yes...which is why there is a thread on this board asking if Boxing can be saved.

Bluedawg, do you watch the NBA?

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 10:54 AM
(I can't refer to him as just JJ, that's reserved)

I do it because I have less of a chance of misspelling it.

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 10:56 AM
And if sagegrouse can be the most brilliant poster on DBR at age 65, what does that say about the talent level here?

sagegrouse

It raises the bar and gives us all something to strive for.

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 11:02 AM
Bluedawg, do you watch the NBA?

i will during the playoffs, but not generally the season. Being an Atlanta sports fan If the Hawks are playing i might. if I'm with someone I'm more likely to watch than if I'm alone.

I love baseball but tend to only watch Atlanta's games. i don't generally sit down and watch a game with two teams i care nothing about, unless I'm with someone to talk about it with. I prefer to watch sports with people than alone. NASCAR, Duke and NCSU Basketball/football, UGA Football [well football in general] and Braves baseball being the exceptions

Does that answer or just confuse? I'm trying but it is not an easy question to answer. I've had times when I have sat down with my father-in-law and other times with co-workers and watched NBA games and had a blast. I would not have watched them if I was alone.

I have confessed not to be a big NBA fan which is why I ask the question...I do not know the answer and I am reaching out to people who do. It is asked for my own personal edification...not to attack or insult a sport.

Jumbo
05-28-2008, 11:35 AM
i will during the playoffs, but not generally the season. Being an Atlanta sports fan If the Hawks are playing i might. if I'm with someone I'm more likely to watch than if I'm alone.

I love baseball but tend to only watch Atlanta's games. i don't generally sit down and watch a game with two teams i care nothing about, unless I'm with someone to talk about it with. I prefer to watch sports with people than alone. NASCAR, Duke and NCSU Basketball/football, UGA Football [well football in general] and Braves baseball being the exceptions

Does that answer or just confuse? I'm trying but it is not an easy question to answer. I've had times when I have sat down with my father-in-law and other times with co-workers and watched NBA games and had a blast. I would not have watched them if I was alone.

I have confessed not to be a big NBA fan which is why I ask the question...I do not know the answer and I am reaching out to people who do. It is asked for my own personal edification...not to attack or insult a sport.

It just helps me understand where you are coming from. The talent level in the NBA is only getting better, largely because the talent pool keeps expanding internationally. Being able to contribute at a young age is not a knock against the talent level of the league. Elite swimmers burst onto the scene at young ages, female athletes in some sports peak in their teens, etc. The fact that early entry candidates get drafted is hardly a knock on the NBA.

To return to the original point, seven weeks might be too long for college coaches, but not the NBA. And here's where we need to separate the issues. The NBA should have one concern -- what's good for the NBA. And if the NBA gets a better chance to evaluate prospects, that's a good thing. The NBA shouldn't worry about whether college coaches are able to recruit well or not. That's up to the NCAA to legislate. And the age limit has undoubtedly helped the NBA, as it has given teams an extra year to evaluate players.

So, that brings us to college basketball. What can be done? Well, a bunch of things. First, we can all stop pretending that the game is remotely pure. The fact is that at most schools, the concept of "student-athlete" is a farce. These kids are essentially full-time employees as basketball players, yet we want to take away a chance for them to see how they stack up against professionals before making a huge decision? Give me a break. If the NCAA wants to get away from the one-and-done culture and/or clean up the game, there are two radical solutions at its disposal:

-The NCAA can make freshmen ineligible. This would eliminate one-and-done players.
-The NCAA can get rid of athletic scholarships, award financial aid on a need-based system and push schools to minimize preferences given to athletes in the admissions process. In short, Division I could become more like Division III. Of course, D-III schools still take kids who are not academically competitive with most of their peers, but it's a start. Eventually, college athletics would be like any other extracurricular activity. And true fans of their school would still root for their basketball team, even if the starting center is 6'5" and no one can dunk. It works in high school, after all.

Of course, that won't happen because the NCAA is a corrupt organization with billions of dollars at stake. But if you want real change, that's revolutionary.

From the NBA's perspective, college basketball is valuable because it offers a free minor league and free exposure for future NBA players. But I would have no problem with the NBA turning the NBDL into something resembling baseball's minor leagues, even if that means sucking much of the talent out of the college game.

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 12:14 PM
I appreciate your answer. However, this comment caught my eye.


And true fans of their school would still root for their basketball team, even if the starting center is 6'5" and no one can dunk. It works in high school, after all.

The knock on women's BB is that they don't dunk and that is why people don't watch. I'm not sure they would watch even if "the starting center is 6'5" and no one can dunk"

yes, there are some sports where the athletics mature at an early age. however, the NBA has not been one of them. You said


The talent level in the NBA is only getting better, largely because the talent pool keeps expanding internationally.

which goes along with my question. If it was left up to the American athlete to keep the standard high could they? If the level of talent is up because of the international talent what has happened to the American talent...which used to be the standard all others were compared to.

Jumbo
05-28-2008, 12:21 PM
yes, there are some sports where the athletics mature at an early age. however, the NBA has not been one of them.

Really? I'd rethink that. LeBron James, anyone? There are countless prep-to-pro kids, let alone kids with one or two years of college experience, who contributed right away. And that's been going on forever.



which goes along with my question. If it was left up to the American athlete to keep the standard high could they? If the level of talent is up because of the international talent what has happened to the American talent...which used to be the standard all others were compared to.

The American talent is just fine. But obviously if you start to globalize, you're going to find even more guys who can play. The U.S. still produces way more top players than any other country, but it's a big world out there and it's only a good thing that we can find more elite players beyond our borders now. If the NBA were populated purely by American players, the talent level wouldn't be any worse than in the 1970s or 1980s. But every sport is going global -- the fact that international players are making an impact on the league is not a knock on U.S. players in any way.

Bluedawg
05-28-2008, 12:46 PM
Really? I'd rethink that. LeBron James, anyone? There are countless prep-to-pro kids, let alone kids with one or two years of college experience, who contributed right away. And that's been going on forever.

That was part of my original question. I knew Lebron made the jump but I didn't know if he sat for a few years or played right away. remember I don't "follow" the NBA, i just watch it.

Thanks

duketaylor
05-28-2008, 02:01 PM
"But I would have no problem with the NBA turning the NBDL into something resembling baseball's minor leagues, even if that means sucking much of the talent out of the college game."

Is there any scenarion where you could even fathom that happening? Questions I would have would relate to exposure, salaries, coaching levels, what the NCAA might do to prevent such a scenario (or if they could), tv rights, etc. Lots and lots of issues to deal with, IMO.
With your bball savvy, I'm curious.

sagegrouse
05-28-2008, 02:07 PM
"But I would have no problem with the NBA turning the NBDL into something resembling baseball's minor leagues, even if that means sucking much of the talent out of the college game."

Is there any scenarion where you could even fathom that happening? Questions I would have would relate to exposure, salaries, coaching levels, what the NCAA might do to prevent such a scenario (or if they could), tv rights, etc. Lots and lots of issues to deal with, IMO.
With your bball savvy, I'm curious.

A limiting factor on the appeal of the NBDL = baseball minor leagues is the low level of salaries in the minors.

Except for the signing bonuses, I believe most minor leaguers receive 3-4K per month for the 5-6 months of the baseball season. That makes college sound good!

sagegrouse

mgtr
05-28-2008, 07:23 PM
As a former college professor (certainly not at Duke), it is my view that we have way too many colleges and way too many college students. Probably half (which is a WA guess) of all college students are unaware of why they are there, or, if they are aware, don't care. Clearly, this is a generalization which does not apply to most students at Duke.
Because of the above, I am opposed to any rule which forces even more young people to go to college. Therefore, I would support the baseball approach, which probably sorts out the great athletes on the one hand, and the potential students on the other.

Jumbo
05-28-2008, 07:25 PM
"But I would have no problem with the NBA turning the NBDL into something resembling baseball's minor leagues, even if that means sucking much of the talent out of the college game."

Is there any scenarion where you could even fathom that happening? Questions I would have would relate to exposure, salaries, coaching levels, what the NCAA might do to prevent such a scenario (or if they could), tv rights, etc. Lots and lots of issues to deal with, IMO.
With your bball savvy, I'm curious.

I don't envision a full minor league anytime soon. From the NBA's point of view, why buy the cow (a young player) when you can get the milk for free (letting a college develop him). But I think this is the natural progression of things maybe 50 years down the road.

There are a lot of basketball players who have no interest in an education, and would play basketball for money as long as they could. Some would be drafted really high and either crack the NBA, or start off in the NBDL while being paid the salary of a first-round pick. It makes some sense. The NCAA couldn't do anything to prevent this, but the NBA doesn't have enough incentive to do it right now.

CameronCrazy'11
05-28-2008, 10:36 PM
the problem is that the 19 year-old age requirement benefits the NBA and just about no one else. NBA teams get a year to evaluate prospects playing against other college players, which of course is a much better gauge of talent than how they play against high school players who are no competition for them. The rule isn't good for schools because when they go after a top recruit they're uncertain if he's gonna leave after one year. Before the age requirement, schools knew that any player they recruited had at least some interest in being in college, or he would've entered the draft. The rule isn't really good for players either. A draft-quality player might improve his status some with a year in college, but he could also see his status slip to the point where he's no longer considered an NBA prospect. For most players the risks outweigh the benefits. I would say the age limit isn't really good for fans either. Would you rather the stars of Duke's next National Championship team be freshmen who leave after they get the trophy or juniors and seniors who you've known for years?

The rule only benefits the NBA but no one else can do anything about it. The NCAA can't do anything to stop players from leaving after one year and it can't force the NBA to change its rule. Theoretically, I guess teams could make players sign contracts saying they won't enter the NBA for x number of years, but then of course the players would just go to other schools that had no problem with a one-and-done. This is why even with all the talk among schools, coaches, sportswriters and everyone else about how terrible the one-and-done rule is for college basketball, it's probably not going to change.

Bluedawg
05-29-2008, 12:23 PM
"But I would have no problem with the NBA turning the NBDL into something resembling baseball's minor leagues, even if that means sucking much of the talent out of the college game."
Is there any scenarion where you could even fathom that happening? Questions I would have would relate to exposure, salaries, coaching levels, what the NCAA might do to prevent such a scenario (or if they could), tv rights, etc. Lots and lots of issues to deal with, IMO.
With your bball savvy, I'm curious.

I've always thought basketball needed a minor league system since so many HS players try to make the jump. I'd like to see it.

Bluedawg
05-29-2008, 12:30 PM
I don't envision a full minor league anytime soon. From the NBA's point of view, why buy the cow (a young player) when you can get the milk for free (letting a college develop him). But I think this is the natural progression of things maybe 50 years down the road.

The advantage of the MLB system is that it enables a MLB team to draft players young and bring them up in the system played by the MLB team. That is what enabled the Braves to be the dominate team in the early 90’s, and their going away from that system is what has killed them starting in the late 90’s and beyond

Bluedawg
05-29-2008, 12:36 PM
The rule only benefits the NBA but no one else can do anything about it. The NCAA can't do anything to stop players from leaving after one year and it can't force the NBA to change its rule.

not allowing the to "test the waters" of the NBA draft is a start. Either they commit to the draft of the commit to school. No inbetween

CameronCrazy'11
05-30-2008, 02:15 AM
not allowing the to "test the waters" of the NBA draft is a start. Either they commit to the draft of the commit to school. No inbetween

that would definitely be a positive step and help out the teams, but it wouldn't solve the problem of one-and-dones.

Bluedawg
05-30-2008, 02:19 PM
that would definitely be a positive step and help out the teams, but it wouldn't solve the problem of one-and-dones.

You won't be able to "solve the problem of one-and-dones" they are a reality of our times. However, I’m not sure it is a problem.

Although I would not want Coach K to make them standard like other coaches do, it is their right. Granted, I’d rather see students graduate and I’m not sure the majority of the one and dones are physically and emotionally ready for the jump other students have the right to leave school early for a great job…why not athletes?

What I hate is the ability to “test the waters” and if the draft is not looking favorable to them they can withdraw and come back to school. They should have to commit to one or the other and stick with it.