One and Done Remains in Place

[DavidBenAkiva]

This seems worthy of its own thread. The NBA and NBPA have left the early entry rule in place in the next collective bargaining agreement.

https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1641848553189277719

[kAzE]

Those Boozer bros will look good in Royal blue.

[bshrader]

This seems worthy of its own thread. The NBA and NBPA have left the early entry rule in place in the next collective bargaining agreement.

https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1641848553189277719

Boozers and Flagg come on down!

[indy1duke]

Is anyone surprised by ths development? It seems like “one and done” is used as a bargaining chip. It isn’t a high priority for either side. What is the term of this agreement?

[Billy Dat]

With outlets like G-League Ignite and Overtime Elite, plus the emergence of NIL, maybe they feel like paid options already exist and they would not be serving a need?

[CameronBornAndBred]

Well, rats.

[HoKogan]

You would think that the NBA would be able to rely on the G league now for kids that don't need to go to college, but this tells me that they still aren't going to invest in promoting it to the casual fan, they'll rely on college hoops as a promotional vehicle for their stars of tomorrow (though numbers have shown that its not as effective as it was a decade or more ago).

This also tells me that they don't fully trust their talent evaluation beyond the can't miss prospects and will use CBB as another filter to screen out the frauds. Its disappointing because it still leaves CBB out in the wilderness without consistent star power. Maybe NIL will mitigate that to some degree, or it could exacerbate it as well. A 2 year commitment would have been ideal.

[tommy]

I don’t know if it’s so much a “we don’t fully trust our talent evaluation” so much as they’d rather have another year of basketball and physical development to evaluate before having to invest in these young players. More information is better than less.

[proelitedota]

Great for Duke.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Great for Duke.

I don't know if you are in the majority (guessing it's close to 50/50), but I'm firmly on the other side of your fence.
Thankfully, Jon has stated that Duke's recruiting approach will be changing, so hopefully we have less OADs in the future to send off each season.

[Orange&BlackSheep]

You would think that the NBA would be able to rely on the G league now for kids that don't need to go to college, but this tells me that they still aren't going to invest in promoting it to the casual fan, they'll rely on college hoops as a promotional vehicle for their stars of tomorrow (though numbers have shown that its not as effective as it was a decade or more ago).

This also tells me that they don't fully trust their talent evaluation beyond the can't miss prospects and will use CBB as another filter to screen out the frauds. Its disappointing because it still leaves CBB out in the wilderness without consistent star power. Maybe NIL will mitigate that to some degree, or it could exacerbate it as well. A 2 year commitment would have been ideal.

(1) Nor is the NBA rated as highly as it was a decade or more ago.
(2) The 1 & done was their response to the difficulty of judging future success at 18 and teams blowing lottery picks on flame outs. It does not seem that anything in that regard has changed in their estimation. In addition I suspect that no one thinks that adding 18 yr olds into the mix will increase fan interest or revenue.

Personally I think the "give the kids their money" argument is really a near-sighted bordering on stupid one. The league and its players collectively bargain for the good of the league and the individual interest of any one person (or handful of people) does not outweigh that. Dollars to doughnuts that one year in the semi-adult setting of college is at least somewhat helpful to the league in trying to transition what are basically children into a fully adult environment. I speak in generalities and not to the exception of people like Lebron who have exceeded even lofty expectations for completing that transition successfully.

O&BSheep

[proelitedota]

I don't know if you are in the majority (guessing it's close to 50/50), but I'm firmly on the other side of your fence.
Thankfully, Jon has stated that Duke's recruiting approach will be changing, so hopefully we have less OADs in the future to send off each season.

If the age limit was lower, players will still leave Duke after a year. Players that are not as elite before.

Any development that prevents Duke from getting as much talent as before is negative.

[HoKogan]

I don’t know if it’s so much a “we don’t fully trust our talent evaluation” so much as they’d rather have another year of basketball and physical development to evaluate before having to invest in these young players. More information is better than less.

I guess to clarify, I expected more of the "straight to the NBA" jumps would be handled by the G league rather than having college act as the primary filter, and maybe in some ways it is, they'll take the phenoms, but I guess a bulk of the G league rosters are NBA players that are on 2 way contracts or UFAs. There's also limited roster space available.

The one and done vs 2 year commitment is all driven by the NBAPA which is essentially run by agents. They benefit by getting as many kids as they can to sign a contract every year.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I am firmly in the camp of "one and done is good for Duke."

Duke is going to get talented players no matter the rules set by the NBA or NCAA. Many of the most talented players going to college are going to want to go to Duke. What I think OAD has done is allow Duke to get singularly talented players (Kyrie, Jabari, Jahlil, Jayson, Zion, Paolo, et al) that can push the team towards the elite of college basketball even if the rest of the roster doesn't quite match that level of talent/skill/scheme. If, for example, Cameron Boozer is the best American basketball prospect and has to go to college and wants to go to Duke, well that's a good thing for Duke.

My hope is that Coach Scheyer recognizes that having more continuity on the roster and a good group of players that develop and improve is another way to building a consistently winning team. He seems to want this, too, based on his interview with Dana O'Neil of The Athletic.

Going forward, having a team that mixes talented returnees (Proctor, Mitchell, maybe Filipowski?) with talented freshmen (Mgbako, McCain, Stewart, etc.) can lead to a team that has both "Duke DNA" and genetic gifts that other teams struggle to match.

In short, I like where this is going.

[proelitedota]

Those Boozer bros will look good in Royal blue.

Part of me thinks that they might want to avoid the pressure and the spotlight of following their dad's footsteps at Duke. G-league is our big competition.

However if we win the chip in the next two years, that should take away of a lot of the pressure on them to deliver.

[Phredd3]

I guess to clarify, I expected more of the "straight to the NBA" jumps would be handled by the G league rather than having college act as the primary filter, and maybe in some ways it is, they'll take the phenoms, but I guess a bulk of the G league rosters are NBA players that are on 2 way contracts or UFAs. There's also limited roster space available.

College independently makes money from basketball. The G league consumes NBA money. There's no reason to think that the NBA has any incentive to change the OAD rule because of that fact alone. If college baseball could make as much money as college basketball does, MLB would happily drop the minor league system.

[AZLA]

NBA can do all they want but I think eventually NIL income + staying in the college experience, with your team and the community support plus access to media, benefits, good food, and facilities, will soon far exceed the G-League experience, especially top programs like Duke. And that the G league will eventually whither on the vine, ceasing to exist without any semblance of being a meaningful cultivator of nba talent. The nba players union and owners frankly don’t value it and systematically ensure that hardly any players are called up; when they do, it’s for a short term run but hardly ever resulting in long-term contracts. Yes there are many exceptions to this we can cite. Quinn Cook for example. However life on the G League road, smaller venues, less amenities, less media, and no strong commitment to the brand and team (its a showcase league for the individual to get his stats up in hopes of getting called up) makes it less fun and engaging for the player, and honestly, a boring product/style of basketball for the consumer. Spring baseball and MLB farm teams, is an entirely different and incomparable experience, because the league values developing talent. The NBA does not as much, and would rather have that talent developing on their bench. I would argue the NBA Summer League is more valued than the G. NIL means young top players not quite good enough to make the first round lottery that year are going to have a better value proposition to stay with their friends and engage their minds, have much greater media coverage, be amongst their age and peer groups, enjoy better facilities and physical training and support — and have much better outcomes long term if they develop into a first rounder, play overseas, or end up in a great career with a degree. We are not quite there yet but these are the forces in play. I said it previously but Zion coming to Duke was a milestone recruitment not just because of his skills (he was lower ranked than some of his peers), but because of his millions of social media followers. Duke’s sports program and their comms/media team are light years ahead of everyone else, so when Coach S, talked about a few 1ADs but more multi year players — he was making a data informed statement — which is the right path. So in short. Duke thrives. G league dies.

[mo.st.dukie]

If the age limit was lower, players will still leave Duke after a year. Players that are not as elite before.

Any development that prevents Duke from getting as much talent as before is negative.

Exactly. I don't understand why people think One and Done originated with the 2006 NBA age limit rule. If the rule was not in place, everything would be the same except we don't get the excitement of guys like Okafor, Jones, Winslow, Tatum, Zion, Paolo, Lively, etc.

I think the rule has been good for college basketball. The superstar freshmen are often (not always) an interesting part of the college basketball season and garner a lot of attention.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

If the age limit was lower, players will still leave Duke after a year. Players that are not as elite before.

Any development that prevents Duke from getting as much talent as before is negative.

Eh, sorta. I don't think that "forcing" basketball players to endure a year of college basketball makes sense or is good for the sport.

I feel less strongly about this than I did before the G League and NIL money made the options a bit more equitable.

But I absolutely disagree that "any development that prevents Duke from getting as much talent as before is a negative."

I see value to the sport beyond Duke, and value in the young men beyond what they can do for my favorite sports team.

[Kdogg]

OAD has always protected both current players and owners. Regardless of public rhetoric it serves neither to eliminate it.