[Bankroll PJParticipant]

 I’ve been thinking recently at how I would love to see guys like Skal Labissiere, Jaylen Brown, Ivan Rabb, and Stephen Zimmerman among others stay in college 1 or 2 more years in order to develop their game; however, I could see all of these guys declaring for the draft since they’re all projected to be 1st rounders.  None of these guys are ready to help a team win next year. The quality of both college basketball and the NBA would improve if guys like this stayed in college longer. Both college and NBA coaches hate the one and done rule, These thoughts just brought to wonder though, why does the NBA not have a set and working system like the MLB and NFL drafts arguably do?  The MLB can draft players from once they have graduated from high school or have completed their junior or senior year of college. The NFL requires players to be 3 years removed from high school and virtually all these guys go to college for those years. Both of these systems seem to be working. Why is the NBA so behind on getting a working system? And what do you guys think the system should be and why?

[LA12Participant]

Yes, freshman could improve their game if they stay an extra year. However, if a freshman is projected to go high in the draft, they are likely to see a decent amount of floor time during their rookie year in the NBA. This floor time in the NBA is going to develop their game A LOT more than floor time in the NCAA. Aside from that, they’re going to be practicing with pro basketball players on a daily basis.

For freshman projected outside the lottery, however, staying in college is probably more beneficial. They’re less likely to get meaningful minutes in the NBA right off the bat, so that floor time in college could be more beneficial.

 Really it depends on the player’s draft projection. To say freshman projected in the lottery or top ten would benefit from staying in college is ridiculous in my opinion. They have more to learn from better staffs, veteran teammates, and facing professional players on a nightly basis than the college basketball experience can give them.

But hey, that’s just my two cents. I could be the only one who thinks that for all I know.

[Bankroll PJParticipant]

I’d have to agree with everything you said. Staying in college isn’t for everyone. All of the freshmen that were drafted in the lottery are seeing the court and look like they will be fine. I just hate to see guys leave that know they aren’t ready to contribute to a team but leave just because they know they will be drafted; however, I completely understand their reasoning for doing. Money talks. So do you think the one and done rule is a keeper or should they move to something? 

(This site needs to make it so you get some type of notification whenever someone comments or replies to you)

 

[LA12Participant]

 The one and done rule is fine as it is. If the player isn’t ready to be a one and done, they usually won’t be. If they’re ready, they’ll usually throw their name into the draft. Yeah there’s some guys who clearly aren’t ready that declare, but that’s poor judgement on their behalf. The rules shouldn’t be changed to accomodate them. And of course, it’s a teams fault for picking a guy who isn’t ready.

 There’s the occasional player who shows lots of promise and seems to be ready to make an impact but doesn’t, and most of the time it’ll be more a question of work ethic than development prior to being drafted (see Michael Beasley). 

Then there’s the guys who stay in college and play well but come to the pros and underachieve (see Hasheem Thabeet). Those players look lost and overwhelmed when they enter the league. You can even argue that it might be because they become accustomed to dominating college students but just can’t adjust to playing pro ballers. Those kinds of guys might’ve even benefited from entering the league earlier and adjusting to the competition, though at that point it’s easy to make choices in hindsight.

In the end, it’s all apart of the draft process. No matter how good scouts become and how much a player may seem like a surefire thing, drafts will always be full of future underachievers and future overachievers. It’s just how it will always be. You could call it the "luck" element of the draft.

[LA12Participant]

 The one and done rule is fine as it is. If the player isn’t ready to be a one and done, they usually won’t be. If they’re ready, they’ll usually throw their name into the draft. Yeah there’s some guys who clearly aren’t ready that declare, but that’s poor judgement on their behalf. The rules shouldn’t be changed to accomodate them. And of course, it’s a teams fault for picking a guy who isn’t ready.

 There’s the occasional player who shows lots of promise and seems to be ready to make an impact but doesn’t, and most of the time it’ll be more a question of work ethic than development prior to being drafted (see Michael Beasley). 

Then there’s the guys who stay in college and play well but come to the pros and underachieve (see Hasheem Thabeet). Those players look lost and overwhelmed when they enter the league. You can even argue that it might be because they become accustomed to dominating college students but just can’t adjust to playing pro ballers. Those kinds of guys might’ve even benefited from entering the league earlier and adjusting to the competition, though at that point it’s easy to make choices in hindsight.

In the end, it’s all apart of the draft process. No matter how good scouts become and how much a player may seem like a surefire thing, drafts will always be full of future underachievers and future overachievers. It’s just how it will always be. You could call it the "luck" element of the draft.

[Bankroll PJParticipant]

I’d have to agree with everything you said. Staying in college isn’t for everyone. All of the freshmen that were drafted in the lottery are seeing the court and look like they will be fine. I just hate to see guys leave that know they aren’t ready to contribute to a team but leave just because they know they will be drafted; however, I completely understand their reasoning for doing. Money talks. So do you think the one and done rule is a keeper or should they move to something? 

(This site needs to make it so you get some type of notification whenever someone comments or replies to you)

 

[LA12Participant]

Yes, freshman could improve their game if they stay an extra year. However, if a freshman is projected to go high in the draft, they are likely to see a decent amount of floor time during their rookie year in the NBA. This floor time in the NBA is going to develop their game A LOT more than floor time in the NCAA. Aside from that, they’re going to be practicing with pro basketball players on a daily basis.

For freshman projected outside the lottery, however, staying in college is probably more beneficial. They’re less likely to get meaningful minutes in the NBA right off the bat, so that floor time in college could be more beneficial.

 Really it depends on the player’s draft projection. To say freshman projected in the lottery or top ten would benefit from staying in college is ridiculous in my opinion. They have more to learn from better staffs, veteran teammates, and facing professional players on a nightly basis than the college basketball experience can give them.

But hey, that’s just my two cents. I could be the only one who thinks that for all I know.

[llperez]

 the nba allows kids to go straight from highschool to the dleague. There they can be coached and trained by guys with nba ties. many teams draft kids who are not ready and they send them to the dleague their first year or two so they can get minutes and develop.

 

 I think the current system is the best they can do. Making guys spend 3 years removed from highschool would be silly and unfair. Tons of guys have come in after one year and been differnce makers or at least able to play and contribute as rookies. Could you imagine making a lebron, durant, rose, irving, iverson etc. (i can go on and on) stay out of the nba for 3 years? A lot of those guys would probably just go overseas to get paid and skip college if they knew they had to wait that long so i dont see extending how long they stay removed from highschool as a fair thing for the players.

 

 As for allowing them to come out of highschool directly, the nba just got tired of recruiting in highschool gyms and investing millions in kids who hadnt played at a higher level. Plus the maturity and body development kids get from one year of college is substantial in helping the transition to the league. The nba has the right to require one year removed so they get a better chance to scout these kids against tougher comp. Its no differnt then many proffessions that require a certain amount of education or work experience before they hire you. The nba just wants to better evaluate kids and i dont see anything wrong with that.

So to summarize, straight out of highschool doesnt help the nba product, the coaches or established vets who might lose roster spots to kids who are not ready. And it doesnt help the fans to watch korelone young, robert swift or sebastian telfair ride the pine. 

I also dont think making kids stay away longer is fair for those who truly are ready which there have been many. You think karl anthony towns shouldnt be allowed in or that porzingis should have to stay over seas until he is 21?The dleague is there to help with the transiton as well for those who do struggle.

i say dont change anything.

 

 

 

[Bankroll PJParticipant]

 The Dleague has potential but as if now I don’t think it’s a better alternative to kids staying in school and playing ball. And while it may not be fair to make everyone wait 3 years, I think it may be best because for every kid that leaves college early and succeeds, there are others that find themselves desperate for a job after their 1st contract ends. In 3 years, a player can be close to, if not have, a degree. And in those 3 years he should have a much better assessment of if he can make it in the league or not.  In football with guys like Jadaveon Clowney or Leonard Fournette, we know before they even step on campus that they’re are going to be pros, but Clowney waited and was still the #1 pick. Getting an education for 3 years isn’t hurting anyone.  You can ask "well what if he stays and gets hurt" and it’s fine to ask that question, but injuries are inevitable no matter how old are young you are. I just think it’s in the best interest OF THE KIDS to stay in college for at least 3 years. If not anything, it will teach them patience. 

[llperez]

 im all for education, but i think you are kdding yourself if you think changing to 3 years will change much in terms of athletes now having degrees and exploring other ventures. Have you seen the wonderlic scores some of those college seniors are putting up in football? Theres guys coming out who can barely read. Have you heard tyler hansbroughs chicken little rendition that was played on the radio in indianapolis? I personally know guys who went to college for 4 years on sports scholarships who coasted and didnt take school sersiosly. Some guys will take it seriously and some are there to play sports and will do just enough to get by and not become ineligibale. I think thats in their personality going back to highschool or it isnt. I dont see how long they are forced to stay in college changing that at all, Most the kids who need to stay long term do, its not like tons of guys are coming out who go undrafted and when they do they usually are already aware of the fact they may not be nba material but they want to start making money somewhere and arent interested in school.

[llperez]

 im all for education, but i think you are kdding yourself if you think changing to 3 years will change much in terms of athletes now having degrees and exploring other ventures. Have you seen the wonderlic scores some of those college seniors are putting up in football? Theres guys coming out who can barely read. Have you heard tyler hansbroughs chicken little rendition that was played on the radio in indianapolis? I personally know guys who went to college for 4 years on sports scholarships who coasted and didnt take school sersiosly. Some guys will take it seriously and some are there to play sports and will do just enough to get by and not become ineligibale. I think thats in their personality going back to highschool or it isnt. I dont see how long they are forced to stay in college changing that at all, Most the kids who need to stay long term do, its not like tons of guys are coming out who go undrafted and when they do they usually are already aware of the fact they may not be nba material but they want to start making money somewhere and arent interested in school.

[Bankroll PJParticipant]

 The Dleague has potential but as if now I don’t think it’s a better alternative to kids staying in school and playing ball. And while it may not be fair to make everyone wait 3 years, I think it may be best because for every kid that leaves college early and succeeds, there are others that find themselves desperate for a job after their 1st contract ends. In 3 years, a player can be close to, if not have, a degree. And in those 3 years he should have a much better assessment of if he can make it in the league or not.  In football with guys like Jadaveon Clowney or Leonard Fournette, we know before they even step on campus that they’re are going to be pros, but Clowney waited and was still the #1 pick. Getting an education for 3 years isn’t hurting anyone.  You can ask "well what if he stays and gets hurt" and it’s fine to ask that question, but injuries are inevitable no matter how old are young you are. I just think it’s in the best interest OF THE KIDS to stay in college for at least 3 years. If not anything, it will teach them patience. 

[llperez]

 the nba allows kids to go straight from highschool to the dleague. There they can be coached and trained by guys with nba ties. many teams draft kids who are not ready and they send them to the dleague their first year or two so they can get minutes and develop.

 

 I think the current system is the best they can do. Making guys spend 3 years removed from highschool would be silly and unfair. Tons of guys have come in after one year and been differnce makers or at least able to play and contribute as rookies. Could you imagine making a lebron, durant, rose, irving, iverson etc. (i can go on and on) stay out of the nba for 3 years? A lot of those guys would probably just go overseas to get paid and skip college if they knew they had to wait that long so i dont see extending how long they stay removed from highschool as a fair thing for the players.

 

 As for allowing them to come out of highschool directly, the nba just got tired of recruiting in highschool gyms and investing millions in kids who hadnt played at a higher level. Plus the maturity and body development kids get from one year of college is substantial in helping the transition to the league. The nba has the right to require one year removed so they get a better chance to scout these kids against tougher comp. Its no differnt then many proffessions that require a certain amount of education or work experience before they hire you. The nba just wants to better evaluate kids and i dont see anything wrong with that.

So to summarize, straight out of highschool doesnt help the nba product, the coaches or established vets who might lose roster spots to kids who are not ready. And it doesnt help the fans to watch korelone young, robert swift or sebastian telfair ride the pine. 

I also dont think making kids stay away longer is fair for those who truly are ready which there have been many. You think karl anthony towns shouldnt be allowed in or that porzingis should have to stay over seas until he is 21?The dleague is there to help with the transiton as well for those who do struggle.

i say dont change anything.

 

 

 

[llperez]

 i also want to add that i think whats best for college should be irrelevant to any rule changes. Colleges have benefitted greatly from one and doners. look at calipari and kentucky winning, okafor and winslow leading duke last year, They make millions off one and doners. Changing the rules to further benefit them even more by making kids stay who play for free to begin with is silly. If they thought the one and done rule hurt them so bad, then they should just stop recruting those caliber players. but we all know they actually benefit tremondously from them so why chnage the rules to help them even more?

[LA12Participant]

 Agreed. It shouldn’t matter what the NCAA stands to gain or lose when it comes to NBA’s decision making. The NCAA has it good enough as it is making millions off of unpaid athletes.

[LA12Participant]

 Agreed. It shouldn’t matter what the NCAA stands to gain or lose when it comes to NBA’s decision making. The NCAA has it good enough as it is making millions off of unpaid athletes.

[llperez]

 i also want to add that i think whats best for college should be irrelevant to any rule changes. Colleges have benefitted greatly from one and doners. look at calipari and kentucky winning, okafor and winslow leading duke last year, They make millions off one and doners. Changing the rules to further benefit them even more by making kids stay who play for free to begin with is silly. If they thought the one and done rule hurt them so bad, then they should just stop recruting those caliber players. but we all know they actually benefit tremondously from them so why chnage the rules to help them even more?

[Hype Machine]

I like 1 and done. Seems the fairest compromise to a system that could never be perfect.

Straight out of high school is a disaster because theres no way to evaluate players against decent competition.

2 years removed from school is probably excessive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Hype Machine]

I like 1 and done. Seems the fairest compromise to a system that could never be perfect.

Straight out of high school is a disaster because theres no way to evaluate players against decent competition.

2 years removed from school is probably excessive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 Let guys get drafted right out of high school.  

You can go back to school or stay in school and your NBA contract takes over.  If you don’t like where you were drafted you have to sit out a year and then re-enter the draft.

So these top recruits can basically cash in AND go to school.  They get paid the second they leave school.

I would consider making guys stay in school two years.  But instead of being one and done, you declare after your freshman season, go back to school, then the team that drafted you keeps your rights.  

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

 Let guys get drafted right out of high school.  

You can go back to school or stay in school and your NBA contract takes over.  If you don’t like where you were drafted you have to sit out a year and then re-enter the draft.

So these top recruits can basically cash in AND go to school.  They get paid the second they leave school.

I would consider making guys stay in school two years.  But instead of being one and done, you declare after your freshman season, go back to school, then the team that drafted you keeps your rights.  

[IlladelphParticipant]

I think the one and done rule is fair insofar that the NBA has the right to make whatever rules it wants to to govern the draft process.  If the NBA wants guys to go to college so that the evaluation process is a little bit easier, then it has the right to do that.  After all, the NBA is going to pay these kids millions for their services, so if it wants a year of college to see how kids play at the D1 level to help project their NBA potential then so be it.

The NBA is not stupid though.  If a 2 and done, or 3 and done rule came about, then the elite high schoolers would most likely skip college and play overseas for  2-3 years to make a couple/few million until they were eligible for the NBA draft.  No way Ben Simmons, or Jaylen Brown, or Jamal Murray go to college for 2-3 years before getting the rookie contract.  That would mean it woulb be a minimum of 6-7 years, instead of 5 years (one year of college and 4 years of NBA rookie contract) before the really lucrative 2nd contract comes.

[IlladelphParticipant]

I think the one and done rule is fair insofar that the NBA has the right to make whatever rules it wants to to govern the draft process.  If the NBA wants guys to go to college so that the evaluation process is a little bit easier, then it has the right to do that.  After all, the NBA is going to pay these kids millions for their services, so if it wants a year of college to see how kids play at the D1 level to help project their NBA potential then so be it.

The NBA is not stupid though.  If a 2 and done, or 3 and done rule came about, then the elite high schoolers would most likely skip college and play overseas for  2-3 years to make a couple/few million until they were eligible for the NBA draft.  No way Ben Simmons, or Jaylen Brown, or Jamal Murray go to college for 2-3 years before getting the rookie contract.  That would mean it woulb be a minimum of 6-7 years, instead of 5 years (one year of college and 4 years of NBA rookie contract) before the really lucrative 2nd contract comes.

[bmac697Participant]

I remember this topic has come up a lot in the past about the one and done rule. A good point someone made before, you can join the miltary and die for your country at 18, but your not allowed to get a job in the NBA as a player at 18, doesn’t make much sense to me.

I can see it from both sides reasons to join out of highschool and reasons to at least be one year removed. 

IMO I don’t mind the one year removed, now I don’t like that were preventing these athlests from getting a paying job in NBA, there are some other alternatives to making money one year removed from highschool, Europe, Asia the Dleague. There are benefits going to europe or asia over joinging the NCAA for development I.e Brandon Jennings, but how much playing time did he really get over in Europe and did that help his development as much as he would have gotten being the number one option on a NCAA team. 

I don’t know the exact stat but I remember reading that the % of players who came straight out of highschool to the NBA their average career was less than 5 years. Now when thinking 5 years on a NBA salary is a couple million, should be set for life, but unfortounatley for most of these players, they were never taught money managment skills and are now broke, no job because they never learned to play under a system before (highschool) and no education becasuse they decided not to take the free ride in school, even if only one year, but at least foot in the door. 

In all I can see all sides to the argument, my thought is its better for these kids and again I mean kids at least take a year off to get some sort of education or make money playing professionally is thats what you and your family need. But I feel the one and done rule is more to do with the NCAA trying to cash in on these players name while in college than actually caring about their life aftwards. The risk of injury or their stock status drops during college career If a player wants to come out and join the NBA right after highschool and a team wants to take the risk, go for it. But looking over the numbers the % of players who went to the NBA out of highschool and stayed after a certain amount of yearss was very low and to think where are they know, did they go back to school what kind of jobs did they find. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bmac697Participant]

I remember this topic has come up a lot in the past about the one and done rule. A good point someone made before, you can join the miltary and die for your country at 18, but your not allowed to get a job in the NBA as a player at 18, doesn’t make much sense to me.

I can see it from both sides reasons to join out of highschool and reasons to at least be one year removed. 

IMO I don’t mind the one year removed, now I don’t like that were preventing these athlests from getting a paying job in NBA, there are some other alternatives to making money one year removed from highschool, Europe, Asia the Dleague. There are benefits going to europe or asia over joinging the NCAA for development I.e Brandon Jennings, but how much playing time did he really get over in Europe and did that help his development as much as he would have gotten being the number one option on a NCAA team. 

I don’t know the exact stat but I remember reading that the % of players who came straight out of highschool to the NBA their average career was less than 5 years. Now when thinking 5 years on a NBA salary is a couple million, should be set for life, but unfortounatley for most of these players, they were never taught money managment skills and are now broke, no job because they never learned to play under a system before (highschool) and no education becasuse they decided not to take the free ride in school, even if only one year, but at least foot in the door. 

In all I can see all sides to the argument, my thought is its better for these kids and again I mean kids at least take a year off to get some sort of education or make money playing professionally is thats what you and your family need. But I feel the one and done rule is more to do with the NCAA trying to cash in on these players name while in college than actually caring about their life aftwards. The risk of injury or their stock status drops during college career If a player wants to come out and join the NBA right after highschool and a team wants to take the risk, go for it. But looking over the numbers the % of players who went to the NBA out of highschool and stayed after a certain amount of yearss was very low and to think where are they know, did they go back to school what kind of jobs did they find. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[llperez]

 i absolutely cringe everytime i hear the "if 18 year olds can die for their country why cant they play in the nba" stuff. Nobody is forced to join the military. The fact is the military is a job where you are paid and given benefits and it is dangerous just like being a cop or a fireman or an electrician on high voltage cables. Also the nba will absolutely employee you and pay to play basketball straight out of highschool. The nba owns the DLeauge and every single player coming out of highschool has the option to try go there if they so choose. The nba is a business that invests millions of dollars into these players and they, just like any other business in america, have the right to require seeing kids play ball at a higher level to better judge their skill level and get a better feel for who they are hiring as employees. Its like saying why should i have to pass the bar exam to be a lawyer, i mean if i can die for my country i should just be allowed to be a lawyer. Or why should i have to go to medical school to be a doctor, i mean i can die for my country so i should be allowed to be a doctor and operate on people. God i hate that argument.

[llperez]

 i absolutely cringe everytime i hear the "if 18 year olds can die for their country why cant they play in the nba" stuff. Nobody is forced to join the military. The fact is the military is a job where you are paid and given benefits and it is dangerous just like being a cop or a fireman or an electrician on high voltage cables. Also the nba will absolutely employee you and pay to play basketball straight out of highschool. The nba owns the DLeauge and every single player coming out of highschool has the option to try go there if they so choose. The nba is a business that invests millions of dollars into these players and they, just like any other business in america, have the right to require seeing kids play ball at a higher level to better judge their skill level and get a better feel for who they are hiring as employees. Its like saying why should i have to pass the bar exam to be a lawyer, i mean if i can die for my country i should just be allowed to be a lawyer. Or why should i have to go to medical school to be a doctor, i mean i can die for my country so i should be allowed to be a doctor and operate on people. God i hate that argument.

[ChoppyParticipant]

 Could the NBA put in a rule where players are allowed to go back to college after being drafted? The D-League is used to develop players, why not college? That way, someone like Skal for example, could get drafted, the team decides he’s not ready and sends him back to college to learn the fundamentals better. NBA teams would have to trust that college coaches have the ability to develop young talent properly (and let’s face it, some college coaches are better than others). 

Could this work?

[ChoppyParticipant]

 Could the NBA put in a rule where players are allowed to go back to college after being drafted? The D-League is used to develop players, why not college? That way, someone like Skal for example, could get drafted, the team decides he’s not ready and sends him back to college to learn the fundamentals better. NBA teams would have to trust that college coaches have the ability to develop young talent properly (and let’s face it, some college coaches are better than others). 

Could this work?

[llperez]

 the nba absolutely allows you to be drafted and return to college. Players have done it in the past. going back to larry bird and a little more recently voshon lenard just off the top of my head. Nba has zero problem with that, However the ncaa ends your eligibility once you sign a contract with an agent. Thats a rule by college and theres nothign the nba can do to change colleges eligibility requirements for athletes who have agents.

[llperez]

 the nba absolutely allows you to be drafted and return to college. Players have done it in the past. going back to larry bird and a little more recently voshon lenard just off the top of my head. Nba has zero problem with that, However the ncaa ends your eligibility once you sign a contract with an agent. Thats a rule by college and theres nothign the nba can do to change colleges eligibility requirements for athletes who have agents.

[Author]

Posts