Barkley: NBA Should Adopt 20-Year Age Limit
By Gary Washburn writing for the Boston Globe
November 1, 2009
Charles Barkley believes the NBA should adopt a 20-year-old age limit that would mandate players be two years removed from high school or have two years of college to help stem the slew of draft busts.
“I have always thought the longer they stay in college, their level of play will improve,’’ said Barkley. “You go to college to learn how to play.
“When you are in high school, you’re just good because you are bigger, stronger, and faster than everybody else. You should go to college to learn how to play. They are bypassing that, and it hurt the NBA for a long time.
If teams had to draft over again, Roy would be the No. 1 pick and Rondo, the 21st pick, would move into the top five. And players such as Paul Millsap and Leon Powe would move into the first round. The unpredictability of the 2006 draft is hurting a lot of teams that were depending on potential cornerstone players to contribute.
My take: The 20 yr age limit wouldn't have prevented the high praised opinions of then 22 year old Adam Morrison, 23 year old Sheldon Williams, 20 year old Patrick O'Bryant, and 20 year old Cedric Simmons. I think the NBA is going pretty good the way it is in terms of the draft. There is no longer such a major problem of great young raw NBA talents not making it in the league. Players that turn out to be busts are typically players that had question marks in the first place.
That being said, I feel the NCAA has the actual problem. I think it's absurd that these high caliber players totally make a joke of the "student athlete," with so many of them being "one and done." Obviously NCAA coaches aren't exactly fans of this either, given the commitment doubts, and now eligibility questioning. I feel the NCAA should simply make there be a required 2 year commitment to the school prior to declaring themselves eligible to the draft. That way the players that are only concerned about the NBA never even bother to play college ball, making a more balanced recruiting competition.
Here's my real proposition on this though. It would be to let high school players be eligible to enter the NBA draft (WTF?) Let me explain. Players that would be top recruits on the college level could elect to go to the NBA draft out of high school if they planned on being a one-and-done player. But opposed riding the bench like most of these players would, they would be required to serve one full season on the team's NBDL affiliate. This would make the NBDL far more interesting to follow, while these players would be playing basketball full time, albeit in a minor league. The players could still sign NBA rookie scale contracts, but this would be less desirable for the NBA franchise to pay a player that won't be available to the NBA team for one full season. Or they could elect to retain the players rights without a signed contract, letting the player play overseas one season if the player so chooses. This favors the NBA teams who are salary cap conscious. This may make teams overseas hesitant to sign a player knowing the player is already NBA property. These players already made it to the NBA with only one year maximum before their first NBA contract, so how many contracts would actually be signed to go play overseas?
Ultimately, this is for the players that need to develop actually develop, while the more NBA ready talent have a shorter path to the NBA, To me, this idea would put the power where it's supposed to be: The NBA and the NCAA. I don't how this would work under the CBA or NCAA eligibility rules, but it's something I think should be considered.
Wow, that's a great idea. The only problem I see with that is there is very little competition in the D-League. Every year, teams send their late first round and second round draft picks to the NBDL. They usually tear it up and are called up by their respective teams, but still see very little playing time. It's kinda scary to think about what a lottery pick would be able to do to that competition. The NCAA would also hate that idea, because it would definitely hurt college basketball.
One of the reasons why the 2006 draft was so poor was because it was the first year without HS SRs. So the 9 HS players drafted in 2005`s draft couldn`t be one and done players for the 06 draft. And there weren't any HS players drafted in 06 so it is only natural that the 06 draft was lacking in elite talent.
Interesting idea, and it reminds me a bit of the MLB. HS seniors being selected but being sent straight to the minor leagues. I agree that this would make the D-League a lot better, but would an NBA team be prepared to pay an 18 year old around $2M a year to play minor league basketball? I'm not so sure. But I am all for High Schoolers being eligible for the draft, but Stern isn't, so I don't think this will ever happen. Good idea though.
AlexBoii, it isn't a bad idea, but the NBA will never pay guys millions of dollars to play in the D League. Besides, what if a guy truly is ready for the NBA after he gets out of high school?
I could go into the reasons again, but the best solution is to do away with the current idiotic rule and let high school graduates do exactly what their classmates do. Let them decide if they want to go to college, join the military, get a job, or play basketball for a living.
Orange_Juice_Jones, how does a 2 year requirement ruin college basketball? The star players are only playing one season. How exactly do they help the NCAA? While it might be pleasant to see Kevin Durant and John Wall play one season at the collegiate level, it's an absolute joke. They sign a commitment they'll never live up to since they only play one season. The true NCAA basketball stars last year were Blake Griffin, Stephen Curry, and Tyler Hansbrough over guys like Demar DeRozan and Jrue Holiday. The true stars played multiple seasons at this level. These type of players will always be there at the college level. It would be better to the true fans of NCAA basketball to know their college players will be around at least two years.
Rtbt, I addressed the aspect of paying players to go play in the D-league. Like TheAlchemist said, it's an idea that's comparable to MLB to sign players to the rookie scale deal, but they go straight to the D-league for one full season. This boosts the interest level of the NBDL incredibility. That itself will boost make up for the millions of dollars going to these players not in the NBA. But they don't have to sign that deal. Just like how high school MLB players could elect to go play for a college team, the player and NBA team could agree to not sign the rookie deal and let the player play one season with a team overseas. But opposed to the MLB and how these players could re-enter the draft, they still remain the NBA team's property. And to go respond to your last point. The great majority of these high school players are simply not ready to go straight to the NBA. While morally it would be fair in comparison to your last sentence, it simply ruins the talent crop of the NBA. You can't tell me the NBA hasn't benefited from the 1 year out of high school requirement.
Alex, I thought your idea had merit, but for a number of reasons, I don't think the NBA will go for it.
You also wrote, "You can't tell me the NBA hasn't benefited from the 1 year out of high school requirement."
We definitely agree, the rule was put in solely for their benefit. NBA GMs were tired of spending millions on high school kids who turned out to be failures. They came up with this rule so they can watch them play against the best in the country for one year. You're right, this is a rule that benefits the league. Unfortunately NBA management pretends its for the benefit of the kids.
Who loses? College Basketball, which already has a laughable definition of "student athlete", most of whom never graduate, now sinks to a new low. The "One and Done" player takes phys ed courses the first semester, more phys ed courses the 2nd semester, and then drops out of school as soon as the basketball season ends, never finishing that 2nd semester. This is something that even most college coaches agree on is a horrible idea and it breeds discontent and sets the table for possible academic fraud.
If you simply do away with this stupid rule, I think the following will happen.
1. Most high school kids will still go to college.
2. The era of the "One and Done" player will for the most part go away.
3. For those very few elite athletes who actually are ready for the NBA, they can do just what their classmates do if given a great business opportunity, they can start earning millions of dollars immediately.
I have more to say on the issue, but I think this is enough for now.
Then Barkley should limit himself to betting only $20K at once, who the f**k cares what that joke says?
not a bad idea...and the nba would still pay there rookie salaries im sure even if they are lotto picks( morris almond did it with the jazz) so it can happen..the thing is i dont think the euro teams would back off and actually would go harder at the players for that one year because they could offer alot more then what the lottos would be making in that one year
I can't exactly comprehend what you're responding to. Your latest post would seem to be more on a topic of "What should the NBA do about the One Year out of High School Rule?" That's not where I was going on this topic. You say my idea had some merit, but didn't explain why it wouldn't work. I addressed the monetary issue prior to your previous post, so check that off this list. Now as to NCAA basketball. My proposition is directly intended to rid itself of "one-and-done" players by requiring players to commit two years to their school (comparable to a normal student going for their associates degree). So for those who wouldn't have intended to make that commitment enter the draft straight out of high school baring the new stipulation I'm also proposing.
As to your point, your basically suggesting that NCAA should win over the NBA in terms of the draft. Don't exactly get why you can't have both be winners, as my idea would strive to do.
Maybe if you explain "but for a number of reasons, I don't think the NBA will go for it" I will get what your going at.
Quincey Hodges, that's another point I'm trying to make. My idea would indirectly benefit relations with foreign teams. Certain teams could make a habit of drafting high school players year after year, while essentially becoming "business partners" with a particular international pro team to let their draft pick play for them one year each time.
but it still wouldnt work because its not up to the nba team to decide who the player plays for..a player even when drafted by a nba team can go and play for any team he wants..so lets say the jazz draft you and a greek team wants you to play there for a year and offers a certain amount of money and the nba team like shtat team and agrees..you can still say naw imma go to russia and play for more or less money..its not like in the nba where you can decide to play for someone else in the nba because youre obligated to play for who drafts you
see how it would make no sense for the euro teams to make it like a business cuz im sure the nba would want a percentage and as it stands now euro teams dont have to pay anyone but the player
That is very true, Quincey about how the player can sign any contract he wants. That's why I said if the team elects not to sign their player they run that sort of risk with their player signing possibly for an international team the NBA team has not worked with, or even a multi-year contract outside the league. And the whole idea of sending a player to play for an international team isn't to get money as if in the form of a loan. That why I quoted "business" because it's more of a friendly gesture with money going nowhere except to the player. Whether or not the player and team struggle to agree on the player's future is all part of the business. It's intended to make the process for these high school prospects a little more difficult so you wouldn't see an influx of guys trying to enter league straight of high school year after year.
My theory is that these players want to play for the NBA, period. Ultimately they want to play in their home country in the best league, knowing that millions are waiting if they're good enough. My whole idea here is these three things:
1. Eliminate "one-and-done" collegiate players
2. Give the more "NBA ready" prospects a quicker path to the league.
3. Give teams & the straight-out-of-high school draft picks flexibility for the short term future.
In my opinion, there would be a great balance of powers between the NCAA, NBA, and the draft prospects.
not a bad idea..another thing though is if the player wants to stay over there for more then a year because the euro team offers more money then the nba rookie deal does?
Alex, let me start with your 2 year NCAA requirement suggestion. I'm 100% opposed to this because it isn't fair to players as it deprives them of the opportunity to earn a living in their chosen field. When you graduate from high school and want to join the military or accept an job offer at a major corporation, nobody forces you to sign a 2 year commitment to attend college. In other words, I don't have a problem with a guy leaving college after one season, such as Kevin Durrant, if he knows he's going to become a multi-millionaire over night. Who are we to force him to stay in school for 2 years?
Let me give you another suggestion. Alex goes to college and at the end of his freshman year GE or IBM offers him $150,000 a year to work for them. Do yo think it's fair for the college to say you can't go because you MUST stay in school a minimum of 2 years? I don't think so, Alex should be free to leave and earn a living. Why should it be any different for basketball players?
Now for your other idea which I'm opposed to. Here are the reasons.
1. It's far too complicated and that's one reason I don't think the NBA would ever go for it.
2. NBA teams don't want to pay millions for a young prospect to play somewhere other than with the team that's paying them.
3. Once again, you're restricting a young man's opportunity to earn a living by forcing them to play in a minor league. If an elite athlete has the skills to play in the NBA right after he leaves high school, you're depriving him of an opportunity to prove himself against the best in the world. Other than the satisfaction of doing such, playing against the best, and doing well, enhances your marketability and earning power. You can't do that if you're forced to play in a minor league.
This is America Alex, we shouldn't have the authority to deprive someone of entering their chosen profession by forcing them to do something different, even if that idea will eventually benefit the NBA.
For example, if a LeBron James is playing in the NBA his first year out of high school, he can garner advertising contracts with big time corporations and seriously enhance his NBA earning power. He can't do that playing with a minor league franchise.
Although I think your idea has merit, my suggestion is a far simpler option that does NOT restrict anyone's ability to earn a living and/or enhance their ability to maximize earnings during a very short athletic career. Once again, if you simply do away with this stupid NBA restriction, I think the following will happen.
1. Most high school kids will still go to college.
2. The era of the "One and Done" player will, for the most part, go away.
3. For those very few elite athletes who actually are ready for the NBA, they can do just what their classmates do if given a great business opportunity, they can start earning millions of dollars immediately.
4. We are consistent with America's values because we're not forcing anyone to do something against their will.
tru except for the last part..there will still be one and done players..when there wasnt a rule there was still one and done players..wont be as many because the ones who usually would be one and done would go straight to the nba
Quincey your last point is correct but I think it's a different type of "One and Done" player. Guys like Derrick Rose had zero interest in college so he was forced to play one year at Memphis, take a few phys ed courses, and then drop out in the middle of his 2nd semester. That was the plan from day one, he was never a legitimate student.
Someone like Kevin Durrant actually accepted a 4 year scholarship with the possibility of staying in school for more than one season. As it turned out, he had such a fabulous freshman season, that he was guaranteed to become a multi-millionaire after only one season in college. From a financial point of view only, he would have been foolish to stay in college.
I don't know if I'm explaining myself properly, but I think the above is an example of two very different types of "One and Done" players. I think Durrant's case was very different from Derrick Rose, who had no intent or desire to attend college.
thats not true..everyone from the area (d.c/maryland)..already knew durant was gone after year one..he said that before een going to texas to a couple of peopel around there...mayeb national people didnt know that but everyone from the area that followed him knew it..the same with steve francis and when joe smith came out and mike sweetney..there was never any doubt...if history has shown it doesnt matter if a player is ready or not after one year..if they have a good year in a major conference(sometimes not a major conferenc)..then they come out..even more so now that euro is getting more publication then it has in the past( youve seen this year players leaving before there jr and sr year just to sign big contracts over seas)...players will always gett bad advice about how great they played as freshmaen and they should try to go to the nba since if they dont get picked they will still get a large contract overseas..so the durant and rose case was exacty the same...there was zero chance that durant was staying no matter how much he tells the media before or during the season
I'm from Maryland and I remember his story very well. If I remember correctly, his Mom wanted him to stay in school as opposed to leaving for the NBA. In addition, unlike Rose who dropped out of school as soon as the basketball season ended, I believe Durrant completed his freshman year. I'm also pretty confident that Durrant returned to the University of Texas to take more classes and is still doing such.
Here's part of a recent interview with Kevin Durrant.
You played a year at Texas before you entered the NBA, but you still are working on your education in the off season. How important is it to you to continue college?
Kevin Durant: You know, it’s very important because there is life after basketball. That’s what I was always taught and if I want to be better after playing basketball, I need to continue learning
None of the above sounds like a typical "One and Done" as you claimed. So once again Quincey, it looks like we disagree and the facts are on my side.
yeah his mom wanted him to stay ..and how are the fax on youre side because of a interview...he said before texas and during christmas break at docs gym that he was going pro...see the difference youre going from what is said on tv and news papers and im going from the streets...ask any real good ball player from the area and see if they were playing at mcdoughna(spelled it wrong im sure) gym when beasy durant tylaws, puck,tim washington, randy gill were all playing out there ...im not sure if you are familar with college basketball players but manyyyyyyy say the right things in the paper about staying and then go...sometimes you gotta know not to believe everything you read...so the facts are on my side not that i needed to expalin..like i said ask any of those people or any one who plays summer ball at mcdoughna or even at the university of maryland auxiliry gym because thats where we all play if you dont believe me and need proof
You seem to ignore facts and depend upon what second hand information you hear in the street. The fact is Durrant is back at the University of Texas taking classes. It doesn't matter what people on the street say, but of course facts never seem to have any impact on your opinions.
this isnt second hand info..this is from durants mouth..im not gonna even argue about just go down there and ask guys who were playing there...the facts dont get any more realer then hearing from the source..but liek i said since youre from the area just go down there and ask so you can get all the facts you need...and what does going back to the university of texas have to do with being one and done???....many players go back even when they are one and done
better yet theres another person who said it...ask Tarasi(might have spelled it wrong) Brown..hes basically family and is always at the gym him a
and since you liek to go by interviews..does this sound liek someone who is leaning towards one and done.................................High School Allstar Games Recap: Player Interviews
April 25, 2006
“I’m a hard worker. I like to play with a lot of passion. As you can see, I scream a lot on the court. I leave it all between the lines. There are no friends on the court, just me and my teammates. I think I’ll bring that to Texas, plus my inside-outside game.”
“There’s a lot of talk that I might have [gone straight to the NBA], but I try not to think about it. I might have, who knows.”
Quincey, anyone can say anything they want and make believe it's true, but there is a difference between facts and opinions that doesn't seem to carry much weight in your view of the world.
Quincey's Opinion: The Nets were pleasantly surprised by Ryan Anderson who exceeded expectations his rookie year.
The Nets made Ryan Anderson a throw away in the Vince Carter trade, giving him away for virtually nothing.
Quincey's Opinion: Durrant is just like Derrick Rose, he's not interested in a college education.
FACT: After Durrant joined the NBA he returned to the University of Texas to continue working on his college education.
Quincey's Opinion: Ryan Anderson exceeded the expectations of coach Van Gundy.
Fact: Ryan Anderson shot 2 for 14 in last night's Orlando game vs. Detroit
Of course I made up the 3rd opinion above, but it sounds just like your argument that Rod Thorn was pleasantly surprised by the performance of Ryan Anderson, who was drafted #1 because of his outside shooting, but tied with Yi for the lowest FG percentage on the team last season @ 39%. According to your argument Quincey, Rod Thorn was so pleased by that dismal shooting performance he decided to trade Anderson to Orlando for 2 career back ups.
That doesn't pass the LOGIC test!
Quincey you can say anything you want and claim you heard it from the boys on the street, but there's nothing better than real life facts.
and thats why i said ask the people i said..they are always at the gym so you will have no problem finding him..that will settle it all..never said durant wasnt interested in a college education..said he was a one and done player( planning on playing for one year then go to the nba) just liek he did..the nets said ryan exceeded expectations all you have to do is look it up to know its a fact...none of that is opnion and liek i said just go to the gym on finding out about what durant said and look it up as far as ryan...obviously what durant said was true since he went to college for one year then went to the nba
heres other people who were suprised....
by Sebastian Pruiti
If you would have told me that Ryan Anderson was going to start 30 games for the Nets this year, I would have been surprised. Not because I didn’t like him as a player, but when he was drafted last year with the 21st selection, I pictured Ryan Anderson as more of a Steve Novak/Jason Kapono type of player. Someone who would come in, shoot some threes, and come out.
However that wasn’t the case, Ryan showed a more complete game than anyone thought he had this year, and for the final 30 games he was starting as our 4 (some of it was due to the poor play of Yi, but Ryan played well enough to earn the starts).
In his 19.9 minutes per game, Anderson averaged 7.4 PPG and 4.7 RPG, but what impressed me most was his ability to improve his ball handling throughout the year. Now he is far from being a great ball handler, but if you look at his early games where he would catch, face, and either shoot or pass you can tell that he has come a long way in that department.
Ryan is a tweener and can play either the 3/4 but he has weaknesses in both spots. If he were to play the 3, he is a little too slow to cover the quicker wing type players and when he plays the 4, most nights his lack of size leads to mismatches. In my opinion, he needs to either work on his speed or his strength this offseason so he can break out of that tweener mold and have a set position. I personally would love to see him playing the three next year that way we could have Vince Carter move back to the 2 (But this all depends on who we draft, if we draft a 3, Ryan will see most of his time at the 4 again this year).
by tom kavin-the associated press
Most experts predicted that the Nets would not win more than 25 games this past season. However, a young team led by Vince Carter surprised many early in the season. Harris, who was acquired in the Kidd trade, developed into an All Star point guard. First-round draft pick Brook Lopez turned into an outstanding young center and fellow rookies Chris Douglas-Roberts and Ryan Anderson showed promise
you dont start the last 30games of the season because you play below expectations
we all know college basketball players dont tell the truth..lol..but thats what youre taught..when i went to abcd camp after my junior year they had us do interview training...they said if asked about leaving eraly you always say youure concentrating on this year and that you will think about it after the season and make a decision..they tell you not to speak youre mind if you feel a ref made horrible calls or a player on the team lost you the game...and my brother told me they do th same thing when you go to the rookies transition program...alot of these things i know from going through it and seeing my brother( who was alot better then me when he was in hs he was top 50player) telling me about all the stuff..because befor ei became good in basketball i used to believe everything i read when a player said" im comming back for another year or i might stay all four years)...most players who are going to college who arent mcdonalds allamericans have in there head if i play out of my mind and they say im lotto or first round im gone....most mcdonals say..im gone reguardless...and some say..imma get picked in the lotto reguardless when i come out so imma stay another year so i can get better and see if i can go higher in the draft...theres one case that i remeber where a players was gonn abe a top 1,2,3 pick but kept deciding to go back to school and that was tim duncan...its pretty much common sense..all these players go to college for a pit stop to the nba and if they can get there sooner while being a high pick the better
hell yeah he showed promise..sportcenter used to talk from time to time about how he was better then where he was drafted and how well he played for the nets esspecially the last 30games he started..ron thorn mentioned it as well as lawrence frank....that guy goes by his shooting percentage and thinks " oh he was underwhelming because he didnt shoot great"
I don't know why I'm continuing to debate with a guy who ignores facts and logic, but call me crazy.
Everyone on the Nets, including the player himself, agreed that Yi was a major disappointment last year. Even though the Nets traded away Ryan Anderson for 2 career backups, Quincey claims he exceeded all expectations last season and pleasantly surprised Nets management.
Here are their stats from last year, when both of them played almost the same amount of time per game and both of them virtually tied for the lowest FG% on the team.
Anderson: 7.4 ppg / 4.7 rpg / FG% of 39
Yi: 8.6 ppg / 5. 3 rpg / FG% of 38
Hmmmmmmmmm, Yi had better production and was a major disappointment, but Ryan Anderson, who had less production, and failed miserably as the long range shooter the Nets needed and wanted when they drafted him #1, somehow exceeded expectations.
umm maybe because yi wasnt a rookie and ryan anderson was...you keep saying facts but isnt the coach , the owners, the sportswriters, fans, even peopel on here fact enough?..lol..good lord what more could you possible want...you keep talking liek they expected so much out of ryan when the fact of the matter is they didnt expect awhole lot out of him...lawrence frank said he didnt even expect ryan anderson to start yet he starts him the last 30 games and prasies him...lol...yi was a dissapointment because he played worst in year 2 then he did in year one...duh..he was kept because the nets think he has more upside genius..yeah im not sure why you keep arguing because you keep being wrong...not one other person has said that ryan anderson was a dissapointment ..matter of fact even before his first game in summer leauge with the magic anouncers were saying the magic got a steal..do you think if he played so bad wit the nets they would have said that???..hmmmm i thinks not
The Nets completely gave up on Ryan Anderson by making him a throw away in the Vince Carter trade, but you somehow continue to say they did such because he exceeded expectations and was a pleasant surprise. If a number one draft choice exceeds expectations and is a pleasant surprise, you keep him!
Once again Quincey, your argument fails the Logic Test big time.
Yi was only a 2nd year player still trying to prove he could make it in the NBA so why do you use that as an excuse for Anderson's failure last year? Yi's production was better than Anderson, yet he was a major disappointment but Ryan Anderson was somehow a pleasant surprise by doing less. Once again Quincey, the facts do not support your argument, but I know reality will never be relevant when it comes to forming your opinion.
Big O, I think most of your points were correct.
I think you're right in that the Nets were pleasantly surprised that Anderson was still available at the #21 slot in the draft. However, he never came close to being the shooter they expected and wanted. As I mentioned several times in this thread, Anderson shot a team low [with Yi] 39% from the field last year. With the Magic, he's shooting in the low 50s.
Yes, the Nets wanted Courtney Lee who had a nice rookie season and they gave up an offensive super star in Vince Carter to get him.
And yes Big O, Otis Smith was smart enough to want Ryan Anderson whom the Nets agreed to include as a throw away in the deal. That was their big mistake because after his atrocious rookie season, Rod Thorn gave up on Anderson far too quickly . Once Ryan Anderson was thrown in to meet Smith's demand, Orlando threw in two career back up players in Battie and Alston.
So the deal was actually Carter for Lee and the other guys were throw ins.
The point I was trying to make throughout this thread is the fact that Rod Thorn would have never included his number one draft choice in this trade if he was pleased by his performance last year. Thorn let Anderson go because he had such a disappointing rookie season. After all that, Thorn and the Nets currently have nobody at PF.