NBA Age Limit Under Attack by Congress

[AtTheDriveIn]

In 2006, the league, along with the players union decided that beginning that year, the age limit for entering the NBA Draft would be increased from eighteen, which was the standard for countless upon countless of years to nineteen years old, citing that athletes coming out of High School were simply not ready for the NBA game.

 

Of course, there was instant criticism of the policy; notably, a high school junior at the time and Kansas State player Bill Walker saying, “I’m against it. I don’t see why you have to be 19 to play a game of basketball when you can be 18 and go to war for our country and die. It’s ridiculous."

 

Last month, Representative for Tennessee’s ninth district, Steve Cohen proposed that the league and the players union scrap the age requirement in their next collective bargaining agreement, calling the age limit unfair.

 

In a recent letter to Cohen, Joel Litvin, president of the NBA, wrote that the purpose of the age requirement being set at 19 years of age “increased the chances that incoming players will have the requisite ability, experience, maturity and life skills” to be able to perform sufficiently at the NBA level.

 

This small detail is certainly true as the NBA has had a myriad of athletes looking to turn pro right after High School only to be cut from NBA teams or go undrafted because they, simply and honestly, weren’t ready for the harsher and much more intense NBA game.

 

For example, a player like Gerald Green, who was drafted with the eighteen pick in the 2005 NBA Draft for his athleticism and potential, though even with all the athletic talent in the world, can’t seem to consistently crack an NBA rotation would have been better off going to Oklahoma State, the college he had originally intended to go and learned what it really takes to be a basketball player rather than to the take huge step straight into the NBA immediately.

 

The old saying, “Sometimes you have to run before you can walk” obviously does not apply here, nor does it with many of the High School players seeking the fame and glory the NBA offers.

 

Other names, just from the 2005 Draft, one year before the rule was initiated, who jumped from High School to the NBA and weren’t/aren’t able to consistently see considerable minutes on the court despite being gifted athletes include Martell Webster (#6), C.J Miles (#34), Louis Williams (#45), Andray Blatche (#49) and Amir Johnson (#56). In fact, only two players from just the 2005 Draft have shown that they are able to play and earn consistent minutes at the NBA level; Andrew Bynum (#10) and Monta Ellis (#40).

 

It is true, that some of the best players in the NBA at the moment are in fact High School players; however the ratio of player who don’t quite make it to those who do is clearly in favour of those who do not make any real impact at the NBA level.

 

In a letter responding to Livtin, Cohen wrote that the athletes have an “economic freedom” to make their own decisions, and although Cohen also states that he understands the policy gives scouts more opportunity to watch certain players in the NCAA, he maintains that the ‘age discrimination’ prevents athletes from being able to support their families.

 

Backtracking through NBA history, in a similar case in 1970, Spencer Haywood was permitted to enter the NBA without completing the then mandatory four years of college. From the period of 1971 to 1976, the NBA instituted a ‘hardship exception’, where a player could apply for the NBA but also had to prove financial hardship. Though it may seem unlikely, this may be something which could be considered by both parties as a suitable outcome if a hearing should arise.

 

On the 20th of July, 2009, Cohen requested a hearing with Commissioner David Stern along with NBA president Joel Litvin. As of Monday, neither has responded to Cohen’s request.

[bravenewworld]

Other names, just from the 2005 Draft, one year before the rule was initiated, who jumped from High School to the NBA and weren’t/aren’t able to consistently see considerable minutes on the court despite being gifted athletes include Martell Webster (#6), C.J Miles (#34), Louis Williams (#45), Andray Blatche (#49) and Amir Johnson (#56). In fact, only two players from just the 2005 Draft have shown that they are able to play and earn consistent minutes at the NBA level; Andrew Bynum (#10) and Monta Ellis (#40).

 

Now wait....

What exactly are you saying here?

That Bynum who has spent the last 2 years of his career injured gets more "consistent" minutes then Webster, Blatche or Amir?

And why label it as minutes? Why not production? Every last player who was drafted in 05 right from the NBA produces similar or better numbers then THOUSANDS of college grads who went on to the NBA in the past 20 years.

Edited July 22, 2009 by bravenewworld

[AtTheDriveIn]

^

 

I'm saying that Webster, Miles, Williams and Blatche, all of whom are still developing really could have used the extra year or two in college to work on their game rather than be put in a situation, where if they didn't produce (and more often then not, they don't), they sat and their confidence takes a blow. Perhaps it wasn't right to include Webster, but I think polishing his skills in the NCAA could have landed him a much better scouting report than 'good third or fourth option on better than average team'

 

Whilst Bynum has spent his last two seasons on the injury list, every time he is healthy, he's been productive. The season before last, just before he got injured, he was averaging 18 points, 12 rebounds, 3 assists and 2 blocks per game. It was a small number of games to judge by, but he still averages 13 points, 10 rebounds for the months before he got injured as well. Then last year, right before he got injured, he was averaging 18 points and 8 boards. Monta Ellis is the same story. You just need to check his numbers to see that whenever he gets on the court, nobody questions whether or not he should be on the court.

 

Edit: Sorry I missed your second question.

 

 

Considering that they do average the same numbers as those who did go to college, don't you think it would have benefited them greatly to have actually gone to college and polished their skills to the level where they were better than those around them? Andray Blatche is a guy I've been watching for a few seasons now. Has all the skills to be a great big man, but it seems like everything is just left a little unpolished. His post moves, although good, are basic; his jump shot, although it falls, doesn't fall enough; his defense, although productive at times, is inconsistent; his IQ just isn't good. These are the things star players work on in college. Had Blatche gone to college, I guarantee, he could have been at least a 16/10 center/power forward on any good team.

Edited July 22, 2009 by AtTheDriveIn

[Legacy]

Nice read. I'm kind of in between for this rule. One part of me sees some busts like Kwame Brown who came straight outta high school, but then you have Kobe, Garnett, and some stars. I think the players need to be smart about it themselves and ask for advice from coaches on if they are ready or not.

[bravenewworld]

^

 

I'm saying that Webster, Miles, Williams and Blatche, all of whom are still developing really could have used the extra year or two in college to work on their game rather than be put in a situation, where if they didn't produce (and more often then not, they don't), they sat and their confidence takes a blow. Perhaps it wasn't right to include Webster, but I think polishing his skills in the NCAA could have landed him a much better scouting report than 'good third or fourth option on better than average team'

 

Whilst Bynum has spent his last two seasons on the injury list, every time he is healthy, he's been productive. The season before last, just before he got injured, he was averaging 18 points, 12 rebounds, 3 assists and 2 blocks per game.

Im still confused here.

We do not know a productive healthy or advanced Bynum.

Out of 328 games this man has only played 213. This is a HUGE factor when considering which young players are developing. And who cares about what stats this player was averaging before injury or pre end of a season... lets make stats matter! If we nit pick stats like that then i can make nearly any player in the NBA look like jordan.

Edited July 22, 2009 by bravenewworld

[bravenewworld]

Considering that they do average the same numbers as those who did go to college, don't you think it would have benefited them greatly to have actually gone to college and polished their skills to the level where they were better than those around them?

Why? There will always be players who accept the 3rd rank role, what makes these guys different?

 

Andray Blatche is a guy I've been watching for a few seasons now. Has all the skills to be a great big man, but it seems like everything is just left a little unpolished. His post moves, although good, are basic; his jump shot, although it falls, doesn't fall enough; his defense, although productive at times, is inconsistent; his IQ just isn't good. These are the things star players work on in college. Had Blatche gone to college, I guarantee, he could have been at least a 16/10 center/power forward on any good team.

Do you actually realize how many college big men i could apply your reasoning (for not trusting blanche as a true big)to? Thousands...

Greg Ostertag for example..

20/10 big man, took the blocking record at Kansas and went on to become a back up center in the NBA. Had great fundamentals and basics, hell has pretty good advancements, but it never really happened for him.

Edited July 22, 2009 by bravenewworld

[AtTheDriveIn]

Why? There will always be players who accept the 3rd rank role, what makes these guys different?

 

Personal development; a strive to always be better. College gives you the opportunity to work on areas of your game which need improvement in order for you to make 'the next step', so to say.

 

Do you actually realize how many college big men i could apply your reasoning (for not trusting blanche as a true big)to? Thousands...

Greg Ostertag for example..20/10 big man, took the blocking record at Kansas and went on to become a back up center in the NBA. Had great fundamentals and basics, hell has pretty good advancements, but it never really happened for him.

 

And if Andray Blatche averaged 20/10 at Kansas, he would have been a first round pick too. And I'm led to believe that in the fashion he would have done it in; showing all of his skills on the court consistently, plus improving the way college players do, he probably would have been better than the 28th pick like Ostertag was; leaning more towards the lottery. It's not being deceitful, like you might suggest, but the NCAA would have been a place where Blatche could have emphasized his strengths and worked on his weaknesses in an environment where 'development' does matter, unlike the NBA where 'win the championship' matters more to teams and where they have the money to spend on players who will contribute now.

 

 

 

Aside from these things, how did you like the article? This is my first actual one I've done by myself. I used to ghost-write for a few people at another website, but this is my first one by myself. Any thoughts of the actual article would be great.

Edited July 22, 2009 by AtTheDriveIn

[AtTheDriveIn]

Nice read. I'm kind of in between for this rule. One part of me sees some busts like Kwame Brown who came straight outta high school, but then you have Kobe, Garnett, and some stars. I think the players need to be smart about it themselves and ask for advice from coaches on if they are ready or not.

 

That's what I think as well, to be honest.

 

I think there should be an evaluation system, but the problem with that is bias from outside sources upon the evaluator, and defining what real 'skill' is, so that idea kind of goes out there door as soon as it gets in. I like the 'hardship' rule though; but it was kind of proven ineffective in the 1970's because of the number of people who applied for the exception.

[moeroadkill]

its really hard to say if there should/should not be a age limit. im not really fussed about if they take the jump but its really up to the kids, but im leaning towards there shouldn't be a age limit. i agree with you that college is to develop your skills at 'take the next step' but it all comes down to really if the kid wants money or not, i think thats the main part of it. they dont want to hang around college for a year and would rather make money. if i got offered a job when i was 17/18 i would leave school too and go make a living for myself and im sure most people would do the same.

[AtTheDriveIn]

its really hard to say if there should/should not be a age limit. im not really fussed about if they take the jump but its really up to the kids, but im leaning towards there shouldn't be a age limit. i agree with you that college is to develop your skills at 'take the next step' but it all comes down to really if the kid wants money or not, i think thats the main part of it. they dont want to hang around college for a year and would rather make money. if i got offered a job when i was 17/18 i would leave school too and go make a living for myself and im sure most people would do the same.

 

I didn't include it in the article, but the letter written by Litvin to Cohen also strikes up a good counter argument to age discrimination.

 

Litvin says that most jobs require post High School education (and the NBA is a job as well as a sport), and even the congress, of which Cohen is a apart of requires a certain age to be reached before you can apply to be a part of it. If the congress are allowed to discriminate against their own, why should they be allowed to govern policies made by other companies or businesses on age?

[deestillballin]

I still don't know why they are doing this. IF he wants to go after high school let him go. Im against the age limit, I say its your life do as you please/

[Flash]

I think they should spend 2 years in college but I know that won't be happening. The fail rate with High School guys is so high and I think it'd be better for the league that these guys could come out of college actually ready for the NBA. Let's be honest, a guy like Kobe or KG doesn't come very often. Even T-Mac took a couple years to establish himself. For every Kobe or KG there's a Gerald Green, Darius Miles, Martell Webster and more.

[Built Ford Tough]

OMGEZZ GREAT ATRIKAL!!!!

 

Seriously though, I don't really know where I stand on the age limit thing.

 

Personally, I think that going to college for even one season is greatly beneficial to everybody and is a great experience for players. I have always been a big fan of players going to college and developing their game so that when they come to the NBA they are immediately ready to contribute rather then sitting on the bench for 2 years getting sporadic minutes because they weren't ready physically and, more importantly, mentally for the NBA.

 

However, I also think that the decision should ultimately be the players. If a player doesn't want to go to college and would rather just immediately go into the NBA draft then they should have that right as well.

 

If I had to choose one, I would probably say that they should just scrap the age limit all together because the decision should ultimately come from the players.