Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 105
  1. #1

    Potential Big Impact on OAD - New NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement

    Among other changes likely in-store for 2024, reducing the minimum age to 18. Would mean a big change for our favorite program, one way or another.

    Edit: sorry. That link is paywalled, but there's several other sources reporting the same thing.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    The article is pay walled. Can you summarize.
    "This is the best of all possible worlds."
    Dr. Pangloss - Candide

  3. #3
    I see one article saying that the earliest it would occur is 2024 Draft. Is that what the Atlantic says? The piece that confuses me is that it says either side can opt out of existing CBA a year early if they say so by this December, so new CBA would take effect next summer in that case, but perhaps the draft eligibility change wouldn't be immediate as that wouldn't give enough time to plan.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Marietta, Georgia

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by chrishoke View Post
    The article is pay walled. Can you summarize.
    Main changes would be:

    - More punitive luxury tax

    - A mental health designation on injury reports

    - Lowering the minimum age to 18 instead of 19.

    The first would be good for competitive balance in the league. The second just seems to be a good idea all the way around. But the third is what would obviously have the biggest impact on our favorite team.

    We've spent so much time debating the OAD model and the pros and cons, it will be a big shift to start thinking about how this change would alter recruiting strategies.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    This would mean that kids could go direct from high school to the NBA in the 2024 NBA draft. Duke has looked at Naas Cunningham, Bryson Tucker, and Tre Johnson from this class who would all seem to be candidates for this.

    Could also impact draft decisions from kids in the class of 2023. 2023 players would be entering a 2024 draft that would be the most loaded draft in ages because it would include the best of the best from 2 high school classes.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Is it clear that the players association has agreed to the lowering of the age limit?
    "This is the best of all possible worlds."
    Dr. Pangloss - Candide

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Didn't this come up last CBA and it ended up scrapped that time, being used as a bargaining chip?

    I won't hold my breath until it's in ink.
    1200. DDMF.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    Didn't this come up last CBA and it ended up scrapped that time, being used as a bargaining chip?

    I won't hold my breath until it's in ink.
    I don't quite understand the resistance from the players' perspective.

    I've heard it stated before that it's simply they don't want more people invited into their club - the existing players would effectively be losing money by adding another year of players. But that's a one time hit for a season in the long-term life of the league. I can't imagine it being more than a blip on the radar.

    I've heard people state that the NBA doesn't want to do that to the NCAA, but I don't believe for a moment that the Association has any concern whatsoever for college sports. It isn't in their purview.

    Can someone else explain why there's any dissent over this plan?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I don't quite understand the resistance from the players' perspective.

    I've heard it stated before that it's simply they don't want more people invited into their club - the existing players would effectively be losing money by adding another year of players. But that's a one time hit for a season in the long-term life of the league. I can't imagine it being more than a blip on the radar.

    I've heard people state that the NBA doesn't want to do that to the NCAA, but I don't believe for a moment that the Association has any concern whatsoever for college sports. It isn't in their purview.

    Can someone else explain why there's any dissent over this plan?
    I am completely not an expert in the matter. My guess is that it's considerably more than a "blip on the radar".

    It's a blip to you (e.g.) as a long-term fan of a long-term sport. But to players in that sport whose careers are, on average, very short, this would be much more than a blip. The bottom ~25% (maybe more) of the league is likely very hesitant to agree to a new construct that immediately applies more pressure to their already sensitive and lucrative employment. And the players (metaphor: sharks) whose job safety isn't really in doubt, I imagine they are mostly agnostic about the fish swimming below them - which is to say, they don't care enough to take a strong stance in favor.

    I dunno, that seems the bulk of the consideration to me. But others that are real NBA experts may know other dynamics in play.

    - Chillin

  11. #11
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is offline Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    I see the end of OAD as nothing but a good thing all around.

    From my point of view it's the right thing morally: imposing a year in college on young adults who are choosing to begin their pro careers is, IMHO, overly paternalistic and condescending. The G-League Ignite and other routes like OTE have been a step towards alleviating this, but they're half measures. In a perfect world, I would love to see high schoolers able to "test the waters" similarly to college players to make the most informed choice possible, but who knows whether that's in the cards. Yes, it would add additional uncertainty to creating college rosters, but that's already so high with the transfer portal I see that as a minimal downside.

    Meanwhile, while the lack of OAD prospects means there will be less raw talent at the college level, it also means we're more likely to get multi year players, which most of us have craved. Yes, it will make recruiting more challenging in terms of identifying players who aren't going to go straight to the NBA to put your resources into, but recruiting was already challenging. I think having more older, developing players will distinguish NCAA basketball as something distinct from just the NBA minor leagues, which will take some getting used to but I think be a net positive in the long haul.

    Two addition points to make here. First, I think NIL will make this transition less abrupt than we might have otherwise anticipated. Before NIL, high schoolers were going straight to the NBA and getting picked in the second round. With NIL, going to a high profile school for a year or two would make more sense on multiple fronts... so I think the players who we see going straight from high school to the draft will be primarily first round locks. Second, this could lead to further development of the G-League as a robust minor league, with teams investing in younger players expecting them to play in the G-League for a year or two. Players should have every right to make this decision, just like high school baseball players who get drafted in the first round, get huge signing bonuses, and then play in the minors for multiple years. Players who have NBA-ready games may go to the draft and develop in the G-League, while players who either don't have NBA-style games (i.e., smaller PGs or traditional bigs) or need time to develop into NBA prospects might go the college route.

    It would take some getting used to, and not having Zion's and Paolo's will be disappointing, but I think this change would be a net positive on all fronts.
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    Didn't this come up last CBA and it ended up scrapped that time, being used as a bargaining chip?

    I won't hold my breath until it's in ink.
    Yes, this has been rumored for a decade. The players are generally in favor of it as a free-will type of thing. The owners would rather have an extra year to scout kids after watching so many busts in the 90's.

    If it does happen, scouts commonly call it the "Double Draft" since you would have high school seniors qualify in addition to the one and done players.

    My assumption is that most of the kids we target like Lively, Flip, Whitehead, Roach, Moore would want a year to work on their games and bodies. Guys like Banchero or Barrett who already have a pro body would be more likely to skip college.

    The tweeners would be the Jalen Johnson types who seem to be a magnet for bad advice.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I don't quite understand the resistance from the players' perspective.

    I've heard it stated before that it's simply they don't want more people invited into their club - the existing players would effectively be losing money by adding another year of players. But that's a one time hit for a season in the long-term life of the league. I can't imagine it being more than a blip on the radar.

    I've heard people state that the NBA doesn't want to do that to the NCAA, but I don't believe for a moment that the Association has any concern whatsoever for college sports. It isn't in their purview.

    Can someone else explain why there's any dissent over this plan?
    My understanding is that owners like the additional year of scouting/development of players as evaluating high school talent is much harder and requires more resources/guesswork. They also get more instant impact guys with the extra year of high quality development.

    Now your question is on the players side. My understanding is that they wanted to reduce the age but are MORE concerned about contracts/money for the existing players so by giving the owners "a concession" on the age limit, they were able to negotiate other things that they wanted more. So it's not that they're opposed, it's just priorities in a negotiation and using certain things as a bargaining chip.

  14. #14
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is offline Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I don't quite understand the resistance from the players' perspective.

    I've heard it stated before that it's simply they don't want more people invited into their club - the existing players would effectively be losing money by adding another year of players. But that's a one time hit for a season in the long-term life of the league. I can't imagine it being more than a blip on the radar.

    I've heard people state that the NBA doesn't want to do that to the NCAA, but I don't believe for a moment that the Association has any concern whatsoever for college sports. It isn't in their purview.

    Can someone else explain why there's any dissent over this plan?
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    I am completely not an expert in the matter. My guess is that it's considerably more than a "blip on the radar".

    It's a blip to you (e.g.) as a long-term fan of a long-term sport. But to players in that sport whose careers are, on average, very short, this would be much more than a blip. The bottom ~25% (maybe more) of the league is likely very hesitant to agree to a new construct that immediately applies more pressure to their already sensitive and lucrative employment. And the players (metaphor: sharks) whose job safety isn't really in doubt, I imagine they are mostly agnostic about the fish swimming below them - which is to say, they don't care enough to take a strong stance in favor.

    I dunno, that seems the bulk of the consideration to me. But others that are real NBA experts may know other dynamics in play.

    - Chillin
    As I alluded to above, I think a side effect to ending OAD will likely end up being further development of the G-League, which will assuage some (not all) of these players' concerns. The ability to invest a first round pick in a promising, but raw, 18 year old, secure their rights for multiple years, but allow them to develop in the G-League for 1-2 years while not taking up an NBA roster spot would make a lot of sense. Similarly, expanding the G-League so that some vets can play there while awaiting a "call up" due to injury or what not would also make sense.

    If I were crafting this, I would couple ending OAD with an expansion of the "NBA Roster" to 20 players. Only 15 players could be active for any one game, and the other 5 would be in the G-League. First round picks would have their contracts amended so they get paid a significant portion of their rookie scale salary while in the G-League, and perhaps if they play a certain proportion of the year in the G-League the team would gain a year of restricted free agency. Meanwhile, the concept of two-way contracts would be expanded so that it applies not only to fringe young players, but also to vets who may need to be "called up" occasionally.
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    Yes, this has been rumored for a decade. The players are generally in favor of it as a free-will type of thing. The owners would rather have an extra year to scout kids after watching so many busts in the 90's.

    If it does happen, scouts commonly call it the "Double Draft" since you would have high school seniors qualify in addition to the one and done players.

    My assumption is that most of the kids we target like Lively, Flip, Whitehead, Roach, Moore would want a year to work on their games and bodies. Guys like Banchero or Barrett who already have a pro body would be more likely to skip college.

    The tweeners would be the Jalen Johnson types who seem to be a magnet for bad advice.
    I think with NIL, the outcome is a bit middling. There are likely some top guys who still would make out better NIL in college than the end of the bench in the NBA. There is marketing value in being the big fish in a small pond.

    Now, how it plays out, no idea. Guys seem to think that being at the end of the bench is better than being a hot shot in college...so I'm clearly not in the same headspace to understand their perogatives.
    1200. DDMF.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    I think with NIL, the outcome is a bit middling. There are likely some top guys who still would make out better NIL in college than the end of the bench in the NBA. There is marketing value in being the big fish in a small pond.

    Now, how it plays out, no idea. Guys seem to think that being at the end of the bench is better than being a hot shot in college...so I'm clearly not in the same headspace to understand their perogatives.
    I would wager, up to nickel,* that almost none of the guys think they will be the ones at the end of the bench.


    *A nickel is way more then my usual bet.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    I think with NIL, the outcome is a bit middling. There are likely some top guys who still would make out better NIL in college than the end of the bench in the NBA. There is marketing value in being the big fish in a small pond.
    The marketing aspect is a fair question. Also, what will the gap be between high level NIL deals and the league minimum for second round picks - these details will probably make a big difference.

    Although, we've seen many many examples of delusional players (and player families) that insist they are going to be lottery picks despite piles of evidence to the contrary.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by camion View Post
    I would wager, up to nickel,* that almost none of the guys think they will be the ones at the end of the bench.


    *A nickel is way more then my usual bet.
    yep, it's great to have confidence but at that age it's tough to have a lot of perspective. As we've seeen, even a lot of OADs should have been TADs...oh well...

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by uh_no View Post
    I think with NIL, the outcome is a bit middling. There are likely some top guys who still would make out better NIL in college than the end of the bench in the NBA. There is marketing value in being the big fish in a small pond.

    Now, how it plays out, no idea. Guys seem to think that being at the end of the bench is better than being a hot shot in college...so I'm clearly not in the same headspace to understand their perogatives.
    it still depends on the compensation. An NIL deal for a marginal NBA talent may still not overtake the income that being an NBA 12th man is. Also in regards to lowering the age to 18, this still doesn't stop the one and done process as those kids who play as a freshman still have the option to declare after their freshman season. It would be nice if there was something in the CBA that gave college players a minimum of 2 years of college experience but thats incredibly unlikely.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Santa Cruz CA
    Quote Originally Posted by HoKogan View Post
    Also in regards to lowering the age to 18, this still doesn't stop the one and done process as those kids who play as a freshman still have the option to declare after their freshman season.
    There will be guys that leave after one year if they significantly improve their profiles in that year. However, the ones that are today's 5 star recruits will mostly bypass the college game. The number of 4 star recruits that go to college for a year only will probably not be a big number. They will be competing for NBA spots with the next class of 5 stars.

Similar Threads

  1. NBA collective bargaining agreement discussion
    By MarkD83 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-02-2009, 11:22 PM
  2. Impact of Early NBA Entries on ACC
    By gw67 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-30-2008, 10:32 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
  •