Supposed "2-year rule" supposed to be announced Monday

[thatlonghairedguy]

instead of one-and-dones ala Oden, Durant, Conley Jr etc., the NBA is rumored to propose a 2-year out of HS rule

sorry if I missed it earlier, but all of the threads bitching about some old, cigar-smoking elf were in the way.

 

[thatlonghairedguy]

instead of one-and-dones ala Oden, Durant, Conley Jr etc., the NBA is rumored to propose a 2-year out of HS rule

sorry if I missed it earlier, but all of the threads bitching about some old, cigar-smoking elf were in the way.

 

[War Machine Dawg]

I find the one year rule a little ridiculous. If you're only going to require one year of college, why not just leave it alone and let them go straight from HS? There's almost no difference. 2 years makes more sense to me, and gives teams that land those superstar players a better chance to win big in year 2 if they can't do it in year 1.

 

[Todd4State]

Even better, that ***** Hopson now has to come to the Hump and face the piper.

 

[mstateglfr]

Even better, that ***** Hopson now has to come to the Hump and face the piper.

</p>its rumored that if the rule is put in place, it would take effect in 2011.

 

[RebelBruiser]

I think they should do it similar to how baseball does it. If you sign and go to school at a D-1 school, you have to stay for 2 or 3 years. If you choose to go to Juco, you can come out at any time.

I'm fine with not allowing kids to go pro out of high school, because it helps protect the NBA from making bad picks and having to develop players too much.

However, I think players should have the option of choosing Juco and a quicker route pro or D-1 ball and having to stay a couple years.

 

[lawdawg02]

i'm a little surprised by this, but not totally. if the league were to decide this policy on their own, it would create a monopoly situation. but since the players' union agreed on the first age limit (and probably the second), then it is viewed as a labor law issue and not an antitrust issue - in which case the collective bargaining power of the union will govern.

what surprises me a little is that many of the stars in the nba played one or no years in college - garnett, kobe, stoudemire, howard, t-mac, lebron, et al. you would think they'd be standing up for the kids who want to follow their footsteps. what doesn't surprise me is that they (as a union) are voting to keep the competition for their roster spots out. actually, those stars are probably the least worried about their spots - it's the other guys who fill out the rosters (and make up a majority of the union) that have the most at stake. those players don't want the team using their roster spot for a "project" kid with only high school experience.

as a college basketball fan, i really like this trend. i don't really know if it's fair to the young players, but there's nothing they can do about it (see maurice clarett).

 

[dogfan96]

I think they should do it similar to how baseball does it. If you sign and go to school at a D-1 school, you have to stay for 2 or 3 years. If you choose to go to Juco, you can come out at any time.

I'm fine with not allowing kids to go pro out of high school, because it helps protect the NBA from making bad picks and having to develop players too much.

However, I think players should have the option of choosing Juco and a quicker route pro or D-1 ball and having to stay a couple years.

I can't remember the number but I remember reading something about the VAST majority of players who went straight to the pros from high school being contributing members on NBA teams. The list of washouts is pretty low. I never agreed with the age limit to begin with. If you're good enough to be a professional, go be a professional.</p>

 

[seshomoru]

of the 39 players taken out of highschool since 1995, six are no longer in the league. Two of those were originally from other countries and who knows if they ever even planned on going to college. Korleone Young was an absolute wash out. Leon Smith tried to kill himself. Bender got hurt, but still played for six years of NBA money so I don't think he regrets it. Some other guy had some back issues, but I forget his name.

In other words, 85% of the guys who went pro out of highschool are currently making NBA money. Would some of them have made that money later? Of course, but some of them might not. The rule is a joke. If it were in place now, does anyone honestly believe Derrick Rose shouldn't be getting paid a **** to of money next year for what he can do on the basketball court? What/who exactly are they trying to protect?

The ******** lies within the NCAA. The college game is slipping tremendously, but it's not because all the talent was jumping straight to the pros. It's because they've legislated the contact a coach can have with his players to almost nothing. It's almost harmful for a good player to go college these days. Even with the best of coaches, they are getting a minimum of work with them. Even then, a college coach isn't prepping his player to play the pro game. So really, there's no difference in the amount of time an NBA squad has to spend on a guy who came out of high school or college.

It's just a stupid, stupid rule.</p>

 

[lawdawg02]

you're only talking about the 39 players who were drafted in the first or second round, right? what about james lang? or others who didn't get drafted? i'm not saying the numbers are completely off, and i agree with your point. if someone could make $1M a year working for microsoft coming out of high school, why should he not be allowed to do so? just because all the other workers at microsoft don't want to let him have a chance, he should be forbidden from doing so? that's the situation here - the players union is keeping the job competition out.

 

[Goat Holder]

nm

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

but never got drafted.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

If I recall part of the argument, the union was in favor of the age limits and the slotting of contracts to limit rookie pay in the first three years so it would help veteran guys keep a job longer. The owners also have a lot to lose in this. They surely know more about a player at 20 and two years of college than they do at 18 and summer camps. Not to say there aren't still some college busts, but probably fewer, especially in the lottery. While Kwame Brown may still be cashing a check, you can bet your bottom dollar that if Washington had that pick back they would have gone in a different direction. Oh, the foresight and leadership of one Michael J. Jordan.

 

[dogfan96]

nm

It's apples and oranges. The football rule is their to protect kids from getting killed. Pretty much nobody is ready to play NFL football straight out of high school. The only guy I've really seen who could've gone to the NFL after his freshman year was Adrian Peterson. He was a man even then.</p>

 

[seshomoru]

That one is almost irrelevant, though. Pro football is incredibly violent, and this is pretty much a natural barrier that prevents any NFL team from even cosidering a high school player. The NFL got lucky with Clarret. They would have fought harder for him to enter after his sophomore year if he had actually been good enough. He wasn't worth the trouble.

 

[seshomoru]

</p>

 

[RebelBruiser]

The reason for these rules is not to help college basketball, though college coaches like any rule that forces players to play for them longer.

The reason for the rules is first for borderline veterans that are hoping to keep a job longer and second for the owners that want to have more evaluation on players before selecting them. It only makes sense that you can get a better opinion of a player by seeing him play against better competition than seeing him just against high school competition.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

the players have better fundamentals, and they are household names. Now, everyone knows who Beasely and Rose are. While some would have before if they'd gone straight to the NBA, now everyone who watches basketball does.

 

[seshomoru]

The reason for these rules is not to help college basketball, though college coaches like any rule that forces players to play for them longer.

The reason for the rules is first for borderline veterans that are hoping to keep a job longer and second for the owners that want to have more evaluation on players before selecting them. It only makes sense that you can get a better opinion of a player by seeing him play against better competition than seeing him just against high school competition.

They don't watch these guys play at high schools. The AAU crap is where they get their DI offers and get scouted by the NBA. Brand and Stern have been glad handing around lately, and this reeks of major NCAA involvement as Brand realizes the quality of college basketball, and it's ratings, have been slipping.</p>

 

[seshomoru]

If they've got their name out there, why push for another year in college?

 

[lawdawg02]

nt

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

I remember them talking about it. Is there a list of everyone who declared for the draft?

 

[seshomoru]

I remember them talking about it. Is there a list of everyone who declared for the draft?

I've just been googling a bunch of stuff. I know there were three that went undrafted Amare Stoudamires year, and then one each in the previous two years maybe. Most years, about 5 or 6 entered but withdrew before the deadline. The exact same thing that happens with college underclassmen everyear.

And lets not forget that college players go undrafted, too, ruining their eligibility. It's not a high school problem. It's an NCAA problem. They are trying to fix their game the wrong way.
</p>
edited: The year Amare came out (01-02), when three high schoolers went undrafted, 16 college underclassemen went undrafted as well.

 

[lawdawg02]

this one shows who was drafted and where, and who withdrew.

here's wikipedia's thoughts.

 

[seshomoru]

That link with Big Al is the one I saw earlier but couldn't relocate.

I'm sure there may have been some in '04 and '05, but I haven't found it.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipsa/A0903454.html

And that's the link to all the early entrants from Stoudamire's year.

High school players will not learn fundamentals in college if they don't allow more contact and practice time with the coaches. This rule serves no point other than to keep the "names" in the NCAA so their ratings stop going down.

 

[MSUCostanza]

10 years too late for us.

 

[dogfan96]

the players have better fundamentals, and they are household names. Now, everyone knows who Beasely and Rose are. While some would have before if they'd gone straight to the NBA, now everyone who watches basketball does.

I think the "better fundamentals" part is bs. Why are there so many stiffs in college who can't hit a 15-17 foot jumper to save their lives? Most everybody in the NBA can, even a large percentage of the bigs. Other than getting their name out there, I don't see any benefit to playing college ball for kids who are good enough to play in the NBA.</p>

 

[oem]

of the 39 players taken out of highschool since 1995, six are no longer in the league. Two of those were originally from other countries and who knows if they ever even planned on going to college. Korleone Young was an absolute wash out. Leon Smith tried to kill himself. Bender got hurt, but still played for six years of NBA money so I don't think he regrets it. Some other guy had some back issues, but I forget his name.

In other words, 85% of the guys who went pro out of highschool are currently making NBA money. Would some of them have made that money later? Of course, but some of them might not. The rule is a joke. If it were in place now, does anyone honestly believe Derrick Rose shouldn't be getting paid a **** to of money next year for what he can do on the basketball court? What/who exactly are they trying to protect?

The ******** lies within the NCAA. The college game is slipping tremendously, but it's not because all the talent was jumping straight to the pros. It's because they've legislated the contact a coach can have with his players to almost nothing. It's almost harmful for a good player to go college these days. Even with the best of coaches, they are getting a minimum of work with them. Even then, a college coach isn't prepping his player to play the pro game. So really, there's no difference in the amount of time an NBA squad has to spend on a guy who came out of high school or college.

It's just a stupid, stupid rule.
</p>

I agree.

</p>

 

[VegasDawg13]

I think the "better fundamentals" part is bs. Why are there so many stiffs in college who can't hit a 15-17 foot jumper to save their lives? Most everybody in the NBA can, even a large percentage of the bigs. Other than getting their name out there, I don't see any benefit to playing college ball for kids who are good enough to play in the NBA.</p>

This is an excellent point. Also, guys spend college learning to play defense differently than they're likely to in the pros, and a lot of coaches in college are employed for their recruiting abilities as much as their actual coaching abilities, so the players probably get "fundamental" coaching at camps in high school that's just as good as they get in college.</p>