Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jerry Sandusky's Wife Tries To Run A Reporter Over

Raise the NBA Draft Minimum Age

He might not have had the best intentions, but Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee is right.  The 19 years of age and 1 year removed from high school ('19 plus 1') restriction on NBA Draft entrants should be changed.  Since being implemented in the 2006 NBA Draft, the minimum age limit has had unintended effects including:

  • Rewarding coaches that recruit for a season rather than build programs -- Kansas State has had one NCAA Tournament appearance this decade and it just so happens to be the year Mike Beasley spent his mandatory sojourn in Manhattan, Kansas.
  • Further mocking the notion of a student-athlete - How many classes have one-and-dones actually attended while at school for 9 months?  Why should their tuition be subsidized if they plan to overtly avoid the free education being provided?
  • Increasing the power of AAU programs - AAU coaches and cronies create bidding wars for the services of one-and-done players, knowing they will see a major payday when the following June rolls around.

The problem lies in the fact that the NBA feels that the professional game is diluted by the inclusion of players straight out of high school.  These are boys trying to compete with men, they argue.  They contend that for every Kobe Bryant - a Hall of Fame number one pick, there's a Kwame Brown - a swing, miss and hit yourself in the crotch on the follow through type pick.  For every LeBron James - a player that makes an immediate impact, there's an Al Harrington - a player that takes years to get up to speed, years that could have been spent in college.  And then there are also the Lenny Cooke and DeAngelo Collins type high schoolers that declare, are not drafted and no longer eligible for college.  But alas, the NBA has every right to limit membership into its exclusive association.  It's their party and they'll piss on the cake if they want to.  So what can be done?

If the NBA won't abolish the restriction, they should increase the minimum age required to enter the draft.  Instead of being 19 plus 1, it should be 21 plus 3.  Graduating high school players should be given the choice to either commit to playing three years at a University, or playing abroad until eligible for the draft.  They should have the opportunity to improve their game while attaining a free education, or compete professionally while earning money.  Doing so will remove the negative trends outlined above that currently plague college basketball.  The current system encourages players that have no business being in college to attend for a year, despite having no intention to fulfill the student aspect of their student-athlete titles.  The current system creates an incentive for morally-ambiguous and near-sighted coaches to recruit players, despite obvious warning signs over the recruits' academic histories.  And the current system allows the recruitment of players to become a business, with a college coach, team and program succumbing to demands made by handlers, posses and AAU coaches.  Increasing the age limit will rid college basketball of the filth that currently infests it.  The filth that everyone smells but passes the responsibility to clean.

The obvious and number one objection to what is proposed above is that the college game will suffer as a result of forcing its best players to go abroad.  The game will be less exciting, less interesting and less attractive to fans and more importantly, advertisers.  I do not necessarily think that is true.  Take the Big East for example.  This past year the Big East had quite possibly one of the greatest seasons ever had by a conference.  Three number one seeds, five Sweet Sixteen teams, four Elite Eight squads - all records.  If the 21 plus 3 rule had been implemented in 2006, the makeup of the Big East teams would not have drastically changed, as 11 of the 16 conference members started at least three upperclassmen.  Eleven teams had a starting five of which the majority stayed until at least their junior years, despite having the ability to go pro after their freshman years.  A look at this year's Sweet Sixteen yields similar results; 14 out of the 16 teams in the 2009 Sweet Sixteen started three or more upperclassmen.

The outcome of increasing the NBA age minimum will be two-fold.  It will appease the NBA which is so very fearful of 18-year olds burning out and it will also clean up the college game.  The majority of NCAA infractions that have occurred recently have been publicly disclosed after the alleged perpetrators have left the program.  By increasing the age minimum, fewer academically-disinclined athletes will join the collegiate ranks, and coaches will be forced to evaluate risky recruits with a long-term perspective.

Good tallk.

Comment 8 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great Post

I totally agree that something needs to be done about the age limit conundrum. As a college basketball fan, I love raising the age limit and see it as a win-win.

Something to consider going forward is potentially giving kids the choice between coming straight out of high school or the 21 and 3 rule. If you go to college, you have wait. If you are ready (a la Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett and LeBron James) and are sure you can compete by all means do. But, you better be sure because you’ll be going up against men three years older than you who are more seasoned and more complete basketball players. This should separate the LeBron Jameses of the world from the Gerald Greens.

A little hard to nail down exactly (making a straightforward 21 and 3 rule an easier sell and more realistic) and difficult to execute, but I think it would be interesting to try for 5 years. Can’t be much worse than right now.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe even the best of things, and no good thing ever dies." - At this point it's all we have.

by Paging Victor Page on Jun 5, 2009 4:41 PM EDT reply actions  

What if the NBA doesn't comply...

Here is another alternative that college can do to improve the game:

Make every scholarship offered to a player last three years, at a minimum. So regardless of whether the player is on the team, playing in the NBA, or playing in Europe, if he played as a freshman, his scholarship would be locked until the year he would have been a junior. This would force coaches to recruit players serious about academics, and take risks on one and dones at the expense of future teams. And it will penalize teams for transfers… which would suck for Georgetown…

I realize the APR tries to accomplish this, by penalizing schools for not graduating players, but the effect is minuscule since teams load their roster with 4-year bench warmers. Also the effect of APR is not immediate.

Good talk.

by Hire Esherick on Jun 5, 2009 7:45 PM EDT reply actions  

well said

Great post Esh. Keep em coming and let’s continue to spread the word about Casual Hoya. You guys are doing great work here.

by GrittyCrusader on Jun 5, 2009 9:54 PM EDT reply actions  

Good Changes For All Involved

I think all of these ideas make great sense. I personally would make the rule iron-clad (21 plus 3 for EVERYONE). As long as the NBA continues to exploit the college system as its de facto farm league or development program, it should have an interest in protecting the system. Yes……..the occasional Kobe or Lebron might have to spend a few years in college…….and maybe even graduate at some point. They would be better ambassadors for the league for it and their basketball skills won’t degrade. And if they feel they must make the big bucks early, let them go to Europe (FOR THREE YEARS!!! HA!……..not just a one season commitment). Far tougher decision in my book for an 18 year old!

The integrity of the college game has been chipped at over the years and the “one and done” development is awful. I must admit I winced a little (yeah and cheered a lot) when Greg Monroe agreed to come to G’Town as I figured he would be gone soon……..so good to have him back for all sorts of reasons.

I will end by concurring with Gritty that this site is great. All Hoyas All Basketball All The Time (and with important content restrictions as it relates to Jim Boeheim).

by hoyaparanoia on Jun 6, 2009 11:57 AM EDT reply actions  

What the hell are you talking about

Why in the hell would you raise the nba age limit and keep players from feeding their families. If they are a bust then they still received money and they know what to work on if they want to keep playing. Kids are starving playing division 1 basketball, but i dont expect anyone of you to know that because i doubt you play basketball. They dont do it in tennis, soccer, or any other sport other than football. Who the hell cares about the college game if the only way you can get it to be good is hold kids back. If the kids can get millions why not let them. I can name thousands of kids who came in the college game hyped and left as horrible seniors. If they are good enough let them play in the NBA at 12 years old. Why dont i here anything about golf or tennis. I bet no one in this forum played basketball or you woudnt think like this. DO you know how much work the kids have to put in to be this good. Many of these kids come from poverty. They go to college, waste their time just to have their families still suffer untill they can get out to the NBA. If the kids arent ready do you think that the teams would draft them. You name a few names and its bad. Well how about mateen cleaves and tranjdon landom and countless others. If your are good enough then you are good enough.

by superscout1 on Jun 6, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is why I support the straight from high school OR restrict to 21 and 3 option. If the kids are good enough, by all means let them go, but if they aren’t quite ready they go to college because they’d have to be good enough to get drafted against kid three years older than them. This gives the LeBron Jameses and Kobe Bryants of the world the chance still, but turns Gerald Green into Gerald Henderson (aka, supremely talented, but not quite ready to NBA-ready mentally as well).

"Hope is a good thing, maybe even the best of things, and no good thing ever dies." - At this point it's all we have.

by Paging Victor Page on Jun 7, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions  

What are the chances

That the 21 and 3 option creates an increased demand for strong(er) minor league play in the US? I.e. talented 18 year olds don’t feel like they have to go to Europe for their only non-college option. And yes, I know the NBDL has a long way to go …

by 40-Year Old Man on Jun 8, 2009 5:00 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

It's like religion, without the guilt.

John Thompson Jr.

Bulldog_logo_small CasualHoya

Hero_small Hire Esherick

John Thompson III

Jg_small JGD

Jonathan Wallace

Henrysims_small hoyasincebirth

Images_small TheMidRangeGame

Small OverTheHilltop