NBA Age Limit

[Legacy]

What are your thoughts on the NBA age limit? Are you for it or against it? Why?

Edited February 18, 2010 by Legacy

[Universe]

I think it should be like the NHL. You can get drafted at 18 but you still go play college ball or go overseas. I think college basketball would be awesome because Lakers fans could catch Syracuse games because a prospect is on the team.

 

I know I've become fans of college teams because of watching highlights of players drafted by the Nets. I watched so many of Acie Law's games and I would never of knew how good he was if it wasn't for Wright.

[Redneck]

I am generally for it and think it should be raised. It allows players to enter the NBA and make an impact. Look how long it's taken for guys like Blatch and Perkins to become impactful on good NBA teams. Even Kobe took a few years before he was anything but a role player.

 

However, if it's a sticking point in the new CBA agreements than I'd rather see some 18 year old playing NBA basketball than no NBA basketball at all.

[deestillballin]

Its their life. If they turn out to be a Lebron/Kobe/Garnett good! If they turn out to be a Shaun Livingston, sucks to be them. LOL. Let them do what they want, let them live their lives, lol.

[Poe]

Its their life. If they turn out to be a Lebron/Kobe/Garnett good! If they turn out to be a Shaun Livingston, sucks to be them. LOL. Let them do what they want, let them live their lives, lol.

I agree completely. People should be allowed to make decisions for themselves.

 

Besides, if a kid can ball, man, then let the kid go pro if he wants to. If someone wants to go pro, and a team wants to take him, then where's the [expletive]ing problem???

 

I probably should stop there, but why make someone wait? So he can spend one year taking classes, which have completely no affect on the ability to play a sport, when he could already be making money at the next level? Plus, if for whatever reason someone is unable to play, whether he turns out to be a flop or if he gets a career-ending injury, he's still under contract. With the money he'll be getting, he can still pay for his college education.

 

If he turns out to get a career-ending injury AND be an idiot and wind up spending all his money on gambling or something, well like dee said, sucks for them. That was their choice. If someone wins 10 million dollars in a lottery, for example, and he so happened to just finish high school, nobody is going to tell him or her that they have to go to college first before receiving their earnings.

 

 

So all in all, if someone is good enough to go pro, then let them go pro. You don't need to major in anything to be a basketball player. Whether they can handle the money or not, that's their problem. So what does that leave out? Nothing. There is absolutely no reason why someone can't go to the NBA without going to college first.

 

Actually, I wouldn't even mind if someone even as young as 15 years old went to the NBA and didn't finish high school yet. They could finish their school work online between practices and games.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Poe

[CaliCurbStomppa]

I honestly don't care what the rule is. I think it fine to be 18 years old and enter the league if your that good what people are saying about you. If you don't want to go college and enter the NBA then so be it. Don't see why it such a big problem.

[Phightins]

I don't really see a reason for one. In MLB and NHL you can get drafted right out of high school (and, in the case of baseball, sign with a team even younger than that if you are a foreign import). If you are good enough, I do not see why you should not be able to enter the league.

[AtTheDriveIn]

If you are good enough, I do not see why you should not be able to enter the league.

 

Simple fact is that most 18 year old players aren't good enough. There's one or two each draft that can play somewhat meaningfully for some of the worse teams in the league, but there's also ten to fifteen guys who don't make it and ruin the prospect of playing college basketball.

 

I'm generally against allowing high schooler's into the NBA. I think that college makes high school players better than sitting on an NBA bench for three years ever could and that's my only basic reason for my thinking. Plus seeing players like Monta Ellis at Mississippi State or Lou Williams at the University of Georgia (Their colleges of choice before opting on being non-guaranteed second round picks) only makes another league that I love, the NCAA, more interesting, more competitive and certainly better to watch.

[Clutch]

ye it should be lowered..if i was talented..i would wanna go right away so i can play as long as i can in the nba..more time to accomplish things lol - look at bron..this man is only in his 7th season..hes still 25 ..wade is like 29 got one ring and has probably a few more years before he starts slowin down

[AboveLegit]

I think this decision is part of a bigger decision (that has yet to be announced) to force the overhaul of the AAU system in basketball. Right now, the AAU system in high school aged kids is incredibly corrupt, owned and sponsored by corporations, and coached by great players dads that want big paychecks for their kids, no matter the cost to the development of the kids. High Schools are much better at regulating their students and coaches because coaches are accountable to the school. Stern and Miles are meeting more about the ways they can curb the influence of AAU by encouraging kids to do well both academically and with their skills in high school in order to get into a good college. NBA scouts spend too much time scouting AAU, where they can talk to coaches and sponsors, while college coaches spend more time in high schools, where they can legally talk to coaches and the NBA has to be more hands off.

 

And in case you haven't been watching the NBA for the last 10 years (the years of the high school phenom), the quality of Basketball, as a whole, (there are exceptions) has gone significantly down. It used to be, that 3 or 4 year college players came into the league ready to immediately contribute. Everyone drafted in the first round had two or three years of college experience and was immediately able to contribute at the Pro level (not everyone, but a lot more players than today). Now, if you're a 4 year player, its because you weren't good enough to earn a big paycheck. No matter how you add things up, you cannot discount the lack of basic fundamentals and skill in the league. 25 years ago, most teams had 2 or more VERY skilled big men that had multiple post moves, good passing skills, and great footwork for rebounding and defense. Effective, quality Point Guards were abundant and most teams were able to find very good ones in the league.

 

Now, while there is an abundance of physically talented 7'0 footers that have come into the league recently, only a select few have developed into good players. Back when Hakeem, Patrick Ewing, Shaq, Duncan, Kareem, and guys like that came into the NBA, they had 2, 3 or 4 years of college development (and no AAU experience) that allowed them to immediately dominate in the NBA.

 

Look at guys like Andrew Bynum, Kwame Brown, Dwight Howard for examples of what their missing. Except for Howard, the other two had to ride the bench a lot for their first 2 seasons. They came into the league behind a steep learning curve and IMO their development is not what it could have been if they had gone to college first. We're getting excited about Bynum (after 3 seasons) just now starting to average 13 and 10 as a center. I would conjecture that if he went to college for those 3 years, played in the NCAA tournament a couple of times, started 35 games a year playing 32 minutes with a development coach (versus a matchup/strategy coach like Phil), he might have been ready to average 16 and 10 as a rookie center, like great centers of the 80's and early 90's used to do when coming into the league. Who knows how much better Bynum might be, and now he is already showing wear and tear of playing too many games too young (he's gone down to injury in 2 out of his first 3 seasons). I even think that some of Howards deficiencies (he has some) might be better, putting him at a closer to Shaq in his prime level, versus where he is right now. Dwight may never become what O'Neal was, and he had every tool needed to be that good.

 

It will be better for the NBA to have "complete" players ready to play. now we draft lottery picks and say, "well, so and so can shoot well from the perimeter and has good vision, we'll have to teach him defense and ball skills, but we can add that to his limited game later". Before, players wouldn't even be considered lottery picks if they could do everything they need to (at least in a limited way) from day one.

 

I'm sick of seeing "potential" as the number one reason that someone gets drafted. I would rather have ready made, complete players available in the draft. This just simply has not been the case since the influx of early entry players began. Again, there are exceptions, but there are more examples of failed talent because of direct jumps than otherwise.

[Poe]

Sure, you can name a lot of failed picks with high school players, but are you telling me there haven't been failed picks with college players as well?

 

Either way, I don't see how any of that translates into why a player should not even be allowed to enter the NBA unless he's a certain age or has been to college first.

 

Some players are ready for the pro level of basketball right out of highschool, and some are not until after a couple years of college, and some are never ready. It's up to the players to decide what is the best decision for their career, and it's up to the scouts to decide if a player is worth drafting regardless of age.

Edited February 25, 2010 by Poe

[La Bomba]

I think the one year in college has avoided future busts. A year of experience with a top of the line coach like Bill Self, Jim Boehiem, or Roy Williams. It adds excitement to the game because fans are able to watch great players that would be in the NBA if high school players were allowed to go to the league. At the same, it takes away credibility from the college game because you watch guys like John Wall or Derrick Rose and know they're only going to be around for a season.

[Poe]

I think the one year in college has avoided future busts. A year of experience with a top of the line coach like Bill Self, Jim Boehiem, or Roy Williams. It adds excitement to the game because fans are able to watch great players that would be in the NBA if high school players were allowed to go to the league. At the same, it takes away credibility from the college game because you watch guys like John Wall or Derrick Rose and know they're only going to be around for a season.

That's the thing. I think the only real reason this college-first rule is there is because of the colleges. It has nothing to do with education, nothing to do with preparing for the NBA, and nothing to do with the players ability to handle money. The rule is there just because colleges fear they won't be able to get top-notch players unless the NBA makes it so that they have no choice. That makes much more sense to me. It's entirely self-interest.

Edited February 25, 2010 by Poe

[La Bomba]

That's the thing. I think the only real reason this college-first rule is there is because of the colleges. It has nothing to do with education, nothing to do with preparing for the NBA, and nothing to do with the players ability to handle money. The rule is there just because colleges fear they won't be able to get top-notch players unless the NBA makes it so that they have no choice. That makes much more sense to me. It's entirely self-interest.

I got distracted and forgot to finish typing my second sentence.

 

What I was saying is a year of experience with a top notch coach can make a big difference on these players. These high school coaches that have been getting players in the league for years know what is necessary these guys to get into the NBA. These high school phenoms been dominating high school for four years. Playing with and against future NBA player can really help them out.

 

Guys like John Wall, Dwight Howard don't really apply, but there are a handful of talented players who could be a lottery pick if they came out directly from high school, but need the year of college.

[Phightins]

Simple fact is that most 18 year old players aren't good enough. There's one or two each draft that can play somewhat meaningfully for some of the worse teams in the league, but there's also ten to fifteen guys who don't make it and ruin the prospect of playing college basketball.

 

I'm generally against allowing high schooler's into the NBA. I think that college makes high school players better than sitting on an NBA bench for three years ever could and that's my only basic reason for my thinking. Plus seeing players like Monta Ellis at Mississippi State or Lou Williams at the University of Georgia (Their colleges of choice before opting on being non-guaranteed second round picks) only makes another league that I love, the NCAA, more interesting, more competitive and certainly better to watch.

 

Mostly true, but still, I find the NBA's rule to be silly. Either do what the NFL does and make them spend significant in college, or don't force them to go at all.

[Hero]

I think it should be like the NHL. You can get drafted at 18 but you still go play college ball or go overseas. I think college basketball would be awesome because Lakers fans could catch Syracuse games because a prospect is on the team.

 

I know I've become fans of college teams because of watching highlights of players drafted by the Nets. I watched so many of Acie Law's games and I would never of knew how good he was if it wasn't for Wright.

Now that you've mentioned it, that is a great idea. I personally have never been interested in college basketball before. If someone got drafted to the Lakers and were sent to at least a year in college, I'd be likely to follow his team and see his progress. Very interesting indeed...