Coach K renews call for HS players to be NBA Draft Eligible

[NM Duke Fan]

"In baseball, actually in theater, in music, if you're 16 and you're really good, you go on a different path," Krzyzewski said on radio. "I really think that high school players should be allowed to go. And once they get to college, if you don't do that, I think a two-year period -- so you legitimize being in college going for an education. You don't just kind of use the college system as a training ground."

http://www.cbssports.com/college-bas...the-nba-draft/

This is a must read, some really important further comments by him in this article; some might passionately agree, others passionately disagree, a topic for some intelligent discussion here?

[CameronBornAndBred]

"In baseball, actually in theater, in music, if you're 16 and you're really good, you go on a different path," Krzyzewski said on radio. "I really think that high school players should be allowed to go. And once they get to college, if you don't do that, I think a two-year period -- so you legitimize being in college going for an education. You don't just kind of use the college system as a training ground."

While I appreciate his comment, and think he is right, it is a bit disheartening to see him acknowledge that he has been recruiting kids that are doing exactly that.

Not that it is any big secret...he is one of many, but also, with Calamari, a forerunner in the practice. Cal would still be slimy even if he didn't tell kids to go to UK to chase their NBA dreams. And I'm not in any way suggesting that K is slimy. He is simply following the path he believes is necessary for success.

[Wander]

Wait, it's called the G league now? And the G stands for... Gatorade?

[JasonEvans]

While I appreciate his comment, and think he is right, it is a bit disheartening to see him acknowledge that he has been recruiting kids that are doing exactly that.

I think that in the current climate, regarding kids who are clear one-and-done talents, K sees his role (and Duke's) to prepare them with the kind of habits and skills that will allow them to succeed at the next level. It is not that these kids are not interested in the educational aspect of college, it is that they are getting a different kind of education.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

While I appreciate his comment, and think he is right, it is a bit disheartening to see him acknowledge that he has been recruiting kids that are doing exactly that.

Not that it is any big secret...he is one of many, but also, with Calamari, a forerunner in the practice. Cal would still be slimy even if he didn't tell kids to go to UK to chase their NBA dreams. And I'm not in any way suggesting that K is slimy. He is simply following the path he believes is necessary for success.

He has been pretty damn successful with the rules in place, yet advocates for a more "player first" system. At best, it's quite admirable that he wants to change the rules structure that he has benefitted from. At the least, it is a smart marketing move to keep endearing himself to young stars.

[wsb3]

One thing among many traits I have admired Coach K for is his ability to change with the times. He has adapted to this era that many of us don't care for in regards to OAD.

I have long wished for the same rules that are applied to baseball. Coach K probably would not mind that either but in realistic terms probably sees his proposal as being as good as we could hope for in regards to College Basketball.

One thing I would add & this would take some cooperation from the NBA that doesn't show much concern for College Basketball. The dates for declaring changed or something to keep kids from signing to go to college...only to change their mind in May & go straight to the NBA. Shaun Livingston is a prime example that really knocked us back. I think at the time he was expected to stay at least two years. If that would have been the case we might have another Natty banner hanging..

[CrazyNotCrazie]

One thing I would add & this would take some cooperation from the NBA that doesn't show much concern for College Basketball. The dates for declaring changed or something to keep kids from signing to go to college...only to change their mind in May & go straight to the NBA. Shaun Livingston is a prime example that really knocked us back. I think at the time he was expected to stay at least two years. If that would have been the case we might have another Natty banner hanging..

This is a great point. They would have to find the sweet spot such that the kids had enough time to thoroughly evaluate their options and make an informed decision, but they are giving the schools enough time to try to adjust. As far as the coaches are concerned, the deadline to declare would be very early, but that is not fair to the kids. I know this makes things very hard for baseball coaches, and basketball teams are even smaller so adjusting would be even harder.

The increasing strength of the D/G League also helps this, as it gives kids who want to play basketball and make some money and really don't want to be in college a viable option without having to go abroad at age 18. It will never happen, but I think the NBA should slightly decrease its bloated salary cap (money that is being wasted giving ridiculous contracts to the Mozgov's of the world) and increase D/G League contracts to a living wage. The D/G League salary cap this past season was $209k total per team with salaries of $19.5k and $26k per season. Doubling or tripling that is a drop in the bucket for the NBA but would be a meaningful increase for the players.

[SCMatt33]

This is a great point. They would have to find the sweet spot such that the kids had enough time to thoroughly evaluate their options and make an informed decision, but they are giving the schools enough time to try to adjust. As far as the coaches are concerned, the deadline to declare would be very early, but that is not fair to the kids. I know this makes things very hard for baseball coaches, and basketball teams are even smaller so adjusting would be even harder.

The increasing strength of the D/G League also helps this, as it gives kids who want to play basketball and make some money and really don't want to be in college a viable option without having to go abroad at age 18. It will never happen, but I think the NBA should slightly decrease its bloated salary cap (money that is being wasted giving ridiculous contracts to the Mozgov's of the world) and increase D/G League contracts to a living wage. The D/G League salary cap this past season was $209k total per team with salaries of $19.5k and $26k per season. Doubling or tripling that is a drop in the bucket for the NBA but would be a meaningful increase for the players.

A couple of quick points here (I might return to this thread later for my standard rant on why we should be looking somewhere besides the baseball rule). Anyway, it's important to note that NBA salaries are collectively bargained as a percentage of revenue. Therefore, owners can't simply increase salaries by reducing NBA salaries. The players would have to agree to it (not likely) or the owners would have to pay for it out of their share of revenue (also not likely). It should be noted, though that there are some steps in the right direction. Under the new CBA, each team will be allocated three new roster spots for "two way players" who can be called up and sent down at will, without taking up a spot on the regular roster. These players will make a prorated portion of the NBA minimum when called up, and a prorated portion of between 50 and 75k when sent down. This move will likely entice a few more high level undrafted players to stay and play on the G-league rather than head overseas. Conversely, it will likely have a negative impact on players who aren't on a two way deal as 10-days will likely become less common as teams will likely opt for their own two way player much of the time.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

A couple of quick points here (I might return to this thread later for my standard rant on why we should be looking somewhere besides the baseball rule). Anyway, it's important to note that NBA salaries are collectively bargained as a percentage of revenue. Therefore, owners can't simply increase salaries by reducing NBA salaries. The players would have to agree to it (not likely) or the owners would have to pay for it out of their share of revenue (also not likely). It should be noted, though that there are some steps in the right direction. Under the new CBA, each team will be allocated three new roster spots for "two way players" who can be called up and sent down at will, without taking up a spot on the regular roster. These players will make a prorated portion of the NBA minimum when called up, and a prorated portion of between 50 and 75k when sent down. This move will likely entice a few more high level undrafted players to stay and play on the G-league rather than head overseas. Conversely, it will likely have a negative impact on players who aren't on a two way deal as 10-days will likely become less common as teams will likely opt for their own two way player much of the time.

I agree - note I preceded my suggestion with the phrase "It will never happen" - current players who vote on the CBA want to maximize their piece of the pie, and will only reduce that piece in exchange for something else that directly benefits them. Having a more compelling G League product by increasing salaries and having better players likely will not generate enough marginal revenue to offset the marginal cost so owners won't do it out of their pockets.

[Duke95]

I agree with K that kids should be able to go pro right after high school. However, I don't think they should wait two years otherwise. They can't get a college degree in 2 years, so why the "education" argument? Let the kids go pro after 1 year too. The two-year requirement just benefits coaches, not the players.

[Troublemaker]

I agree with K that kids should be able to go pro right after high school. However, I don't think they should wait two years otherwise. They can't get a college degree in 2 years, so why the "education" argument? Let the kids go pro after 1 year too. The two-year requirement just benefits coaches, not the players.

Why a 2-and-through rule (combined with allowing high school players to go straight to the NBA)?

To improve the college basketball product.

[Duke95]

Why a 2-and-through rule (combined with allowing high school players to go straight to the NBA)?

To improve the college basketball product.

Don't see how that improves the product. You're going to set up indentured servitude for 2 years? If anything, that may prompt more kids who are not ready to "go pro" right out of HS.
2 and through has no nexus to education. Its sole purpose is to make life easier for coaches, not players.

[Troublemaker]

Don't see how that improves the product. You're going to set up indentured servitude for 2 years? If anything, that may prompt more kids who are not ready to "go pro" right out of HS.
2 and through has no nexus to education. Its sole purpose is to make life easier for coaches, not players.

lol, I'm not sure you understand the meaning of indentured servitude.

In any case, the college basketball product would obviously improve. Two years to better form a connection with teammates, with coaches, with classmates, with the university, and with fans. Any kid who hates school or just doesn't belong in school can go pro out of high school. Take a poll of college basketball fans, and the vast majority would support this suggested system. It's not perfect by any means, but it would certainly be better.

[Duke95]

lol, I'm not sure you understand the meaning of indentured servitude.

In any case, the college basketball product would obviously improve. Two years to better form a connection with teammates, with coaches, with classmates, with the university, and with fans. Any kid who hates school or just doesn't belong in school can go pro out of high school. Take a poll of college basketball fans, and the vast majority would support this suggested system. It's not perfect by any means, but it would certainly be better.

Well, I'm quite sure I know what it means. This issue is of particular interest to me, and one into which I've done considerable research. But to each his own. It will take a lot of effort to counteract the decades of pro-amateurism propaganda that has indoctrinated so many fans.

You're certainly not the first person to react negatively to my argument, nor will you be the last.

[duke4ever19]

Don't see how that improves the product. You're going to set up indentured servitude for 2 years? If anything, that may prompt more kids who are not ready to "go pro" right out of HS.
2 and through has no nexus to education. Its sole purpose is to make life easier for coaches, not players.

I've seen statements like yours ("indentured servitude") and its variations ("slavery" etc.) frequently used in connection with this issue . . . is that really what you think going to college on a free ride and getting room and board equal? If so, then okay, but I can't but help feel the comparison a bit tone-deaf.

Perhaps I'm wrong (I often am), but it's hard for me to fathom that being someone's slave is something equal to a free-ride to Duke University and playing under Coach K. These guys have another choice. They can go overseas for a year and make money doing it.

Like I said up-thread, I don't hear the college football people making a huge issue that players have to be three years out of high school to be eligible for the draft. Where's the outcry there?

[Duke95]

I've seen statements like yours ("indentured servitude") and its variations ("slavery" etc.) frequently used in connection with this issue . . . is that really what you think going to college on a free ride and getting room and board equal? If so, then okay, but I can't but help feel the comparison a bit tone-deaf.

Perhaps I'm wrong (I often am), but it's hard for me to fathom that being someone's slave is something equal to a free-ride to Duke University and playing under Coach K. These guys have another choice. They can go overseas for a year and make money doing it.

Like I said up-thread, I don't hear the college football people making a huge issue that players have to be three years out of high school to be eligible for the draft. Where's the outcry there?

If you think athletes are getting a "free ride" by going to college, then I'd encourage you to examine the factual evidence. They work 40+ hours. The fact that what they do is work has been recognized by even the 1929 Carnegie Report. Yes, what colleges are doing amounts to little more than indentured servitude: abuse by coaches, minimal emphasis on education, but constantly pushed to perform so their coach can make money. They work in exchange for a chance at the passage to the pros.

As for the "they can go overseas", that argument has been tried in court and rejected. It's patently obvious that the antitrust market does not include foreign leagues. This is just NCAA PR nonsense.

[duke4ever19]

If you think athletes are getting a "free ride" by going to college, then I'd encourage you to examine the factual evidence. They work 40+ hours. The fact that what they do is work has been recognized by even the 1929 Carnegie Report. Yes, what colleges are doing amounts to little more than indentured servitude: abuse by coaches, minimal emphasis on education, but constantly pushed to perform so their coach can make money. They work in exchange for a chance at the passage to the pros.

As for the "they can go overseas", that argument has been tried in court and rejected. It's patently obvious that the antitrust market does not include foreign leagues. This is just NCAA PR nonsense.

Brandon Jennings and Emmanuel Mudiay say "hello." Are you telling me that these guys didn't choose to play overseas and then were later drafted? I'm not sure how this is a defensible point.

I'm not being cheeky either. Going overseas and making money absolutely is an option. If you aren't good enough to go overseas and play then that's too bad, but that might also be a hint that you weren't going to get drafted in the best basketball league in the world anyway.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

If you think athletes are getting a "free ride" by going to college, then I'd encourage you to examine the factual evidence. They work 40+ hours. The fact that what they do is work has been recognized by even the 1929 Carnegie Report. Yes, what colleges are doing amounts to little more than indentured servitude: abuse by coaches, minimal emphasis on education, but constantly pushed to perform so their coach can make money. They work in exchange for a chance at the passage to the pros.

As for the "they can go overseas", that argument has been tried in court and rejected. It's patently obvious that the antitrust market does not include foreign leagues. This is just NCAA PR nonsense.

90+% of scholarship athletes do not go pro and enter college knowing they will not go pro in their chosen sport. As someone noted above, do you really think the scholarship volleyball player is there to enhance her chances of going pro? Yes, there are a number of basketball and football players who have no chance of going pro but are convinced by the people around them that they have a shot. But the numbers are tiny. A ton of breath and bandwidth is wasted on the incredibly small percentage of athletes for whom this is an issue. A scholarship to play a sport is a tremendous opportunity, particularly as a college education gets increasingly expensive. There is no way this should be compared to slavery, indentured servitude, or anything of the like.

I agree with the proposal that you can go pro out of high school, but if you go to college, you have to stay for 2-3 years (I'm not sure which). Truly transcendent prospects like LeBron can then go pro and do their thing. Kids who have no interest in school don't have to waste anyone's time in school. But for the rest of the athletes who say they are going to school, they will have to stay for a few years and make some minimal effort to fulfill the "student" part of "student-athlete." As I have noted above, for basketball I think that continuing the efforts to build out the D/G League would enhance this change, as it would provide a domestic place for kids who don't want to be in school and are great but not legendary players to play ball, make some money, and hopefully develop into NBA players.

But all parties in this process (NBA, college coaches, NBA players, college/HS players) have different incentive structures so it will be a difficult task to get them all to try to work together for the common good. College/HS players currently have very little say in the matter. NBA players have a bit of impact through the negotiation of the CBA, but they ultimately don't care too much about the players coming up behind them.

[duke4ever19]

If you think athletes are getting a "free ride" by going to college, then I'd encourage you to examine the factual evidence. They work 40+ hours. The fact that what they do is work has been recognized by even the 1929 Carnegie Report. Yes, what colleges are doing amounts to little more than indentured servitude: abuse by coaches, minimal emphasis on education, but constantly pushed to perform so their coach can make money. They work in exchange for a chance at the passage to the pros.

As for the "they can go overseas", that argument has been tried in court and rejected. It's patently obvious that the antitrust market does not include foreign leagues. This is just NCAA PR nonsense.

You can officially add Terrance Ferguson to the list along with Mudiay and Jennings. It has been done three times now (that I know of) and based on the fact that all three were drafted, I would say it's a viable option if you want to avoid the "indentured servitude"

[Duke95]

You can officially add Terrance Ferguson to the list along with Mudiay and Jennings. It has been done three times now and based on the fact that all three were drafted, I would say it's a viable option.

Meanwhile, 15 freshmen have been drafted in THIS first round alone, so far. Sorry, you don't have a good argument here. Bilas explained why it's not really a viable option for the vast majority of athletes. I don't need to repeat myself again.