Official 2013-2014 College Hoops Thread

[Willard Decker]

New NBA Commissioner Adam Silver is mulling an increase in the league's age-limit for entry into the NBA Draft from nineteen to twenty. I don't doubt he's serious about making the change- it's been hinted at for a while- but when does he plan for the change to take effect (assuming it's approved)? It would seem unlikely to affect anyone considering this summer's draft but could affect future student-athletes.

 

--Captain Decker

[ZoomSlowik]

New NBA Commissioner Adam Silver is mulling an increase in the league's age-limit for entry into the NBA Draft from nineteen to twenty. I don't doubt he's serious about making the change- it's been hinted at for a while- but when does he plan for the change to take effect (assuming it's approved)? It would seem unlikely to affect anyone considering this summer's draft but could affect future student-athletes.

 

--Captain Decker

 

I don't get why they would want to do it. What benefit does the league get from pushing it to 2 years in college? So now you're giving the NCAA two years of superstar players when teams would draft the guy out of high school if they could? I get not wanting to scout high school players, but I just don't see the point in forcing dominant freshmen to stay another year. The only argument I could see is more development, but 99% of guys aren't "ready" for the NBA when they come out regardless of when they come out and guys that stay an extra year frequently see their stock drop.

 

I could also see that creating a ton of eligibility issues for guys that barely get in as it is. It will also cause guys to look at the D-League and Europe as alternatives.

 

Oh, and to answer your question, I would guess it comes up the next time they have to negotiate a CBA with the players.

Edited February 8, 2014 by ZoomSlowik

[Willard Decker]

I don't get why they would want to do it. What benefit does the league get from pushing it to 2 years in college? So now you're giving the NCAA two years of superstar players when teams would draft the guy out of high school if they could? I get not wanting to scout high school players, but I just don't see the point in forcing dominant freshmen to stay another year. The only argument I could see is more development, but 99% of guys aren't "ready" for the NBA when they come out regardless of when they come out and guys that stay an extra year frequently see their stock drop.

 

I could also see that creating a ton of eligibility issues for guys that barely get in as it is. It will also cause guys to look at the D-League and Europe as alternatives.

 

Oh, and to answer your question, I would guess it comes up the next time they have to negotiate a CBA with the players.

 

It sounds like they're trying to encourage more student-athletes to finish their degrees and assume that if potential draft-picks are forced to attend school for two years that some of them will forgo the draft long enough to graduate. It's not a bad thing for a student-athlete to stay in college for three or four years- Damian Lillard and Victor Oladipo finished their degrees- but I wonder if the problem is not so much the NCAA's academic requirements but how collegiate athletes are evaluated. Potential lottery-picks are treated like new cars in that their value depreciates as soon as they've played their first game, as scouts being dissecting everything that's wrong with them as though said flaws weren't evident previously. Players feel pressured to enter the draft as soon as possible because they're concerned that protracted evaluation by NBA scouts will only hamper their draft position. Perhaps the NBA needs to revisit its methods of player evaluation before making any adjustments to the age-limit.

 

--Captain Decker

 

[ZoomSlowik]

It sounds like they're trying to encourage more student-athletes to finish their degrees and assume that if potential draft-picks are forced to attend school for two years that some of them will forgo the draft long enough to graduate. It's not a bad thing for a student-athlete to stay in college for three or four years- Damian Lillard and Victor Oladipo finished their degrees- but I wonder if the problem is not so much the NCAA's academic requirements but how collegiate athletes are evaluated. Potential lottery-picks are treated like new cars in that their value depreciates as soon as they've played their first game, as scouts being dissecting everything that's wrong with them as though said flaws weren't evident previously. Players feel pressured to enter the draft as soon as possible because they're concerned that protracted evaluation by NBA scouts will only hamper their draft position. Perhaps the NBA needs to revisit its methods of player evaluation before making any adjustments to the age-limit.

 

--Captain Decker

 

I wouldn't think most of the guys that this rule would affect fall under the ideal of "student-athlete" (which I think was actually a legal term so the NCAA didn't have to give out worker's comp to injured athletes before they turned it into a marketing ploy). Michael Beasley and DeMarcus Cousins don't seem like the kind of guys that are going to get much out of sticking around in college. I'm sure there are a lot of guys that don't care about that degree when they're about to become millionaires, and I'm not sure how much the NBA really cares about these guys getting degrees.

 

I don't really agree with the "new car" section either. There are plenty of guys that improve their stock once they start playing games. Joel Embiid is a perfect example, he was a fringe top-10 pick before the season and a guy that might have needed another year. Now he's a top-3 pick, maybe #1 if he chooses to come out. That said, once your stock hits a certain point (first round for most, lottery for some, top-5 for the elite athletes), there's really no point in staying. Your risk of having your stock drop or getting hurt eventually outweighs the benefits of moving up in the draft depending on that player's ceiling. You also delay getting paid another year, which can cost you a significant amount of money down the road.

 

Another key thing to point out is that you don't stop improving when you hit the NBA. Very, very few players are All-Stars from the minute they hit the league. Everyone still has things to work on when they start playing pros. It's really hard to project what kind of player an 18-year old kid will be in 5 years without seeing him play a single college game. You get a little more data seeing them play against college players, but you still have huge misses both ways. Your development after you get to the league is the real difference between a bust and a star most of the time. We've seen numerous guys come right out of high school and go on to have great careers, some of them even playing reasonably well as rookies, so more years in college isn't a prerequisite for success.

 

This is getting off point a bit though. It would obviously help the NCAA because they would get guys like Parker and Wiggins generating money for them for an extra year. It would help more college players than it would hurt because you'd have fewer poor decisions regarding the draft and some guys would improve their stock/be more ready after an extra year. It would help the existing NBA players because fewer guys that can threaten their jobs would be able to enter the draft pool.

 

However, I don't see why the league would want the rule. Execs want as many guys in the draft pool as possible to make choices, and the league has to wait an extra year to get the hyped up stud that can sell tickets. There are also a handful of guys every year that won't gain much from staying in school, with things possibly going horribly wrong. What kind of shape would Nerlens Noel be in right now if he were forced to stay? He's making $3.1 million while rehabbing now instead of sitting out likely the entire college season and hoping for the best.

Edited February 8, 2014 by ZoomSlowik

[Willard Decker]

I wouldn't think most of the guys that this rule would affect fall under the ideal of "student-athlete" (which I think was actually a legal term so the NCAA didn't have to give out worker's comp to injured athletes before they turned it into a marketing ploy). Michael Beasley and DeMarcus Cousins don't seem like the kind of guys that are going to get much out of sticking around in college. I'm sure there are a lot of guys that don't care about that degree when they're about to become millionaires, and I'm not sure how much the NBA really cares about these guys getting degrees.

 

I don't really agree with the "new car" section either. There are plenty of guys that improve their stock once they start playing games. Joel Embiid is a perfect example, he was a fringe top-10 pick before the season and a guy that might have needed another year. Now he's a top-3 pick, maybe #1 if he chooses to come out. That said, once your stock hits a certain point (first round for most, lottery for some, top-5 for the elite athletes), there's really no point in staying. Your risk of having your stock drop or getting hurt eventually outweighs the benefits of moving up in the draft depending on that player's ceiling. You also delay getting paid another year, which can cost you a significant amount of money down the road.

 

Another key thing to point out is that you don't stop improving when you hit the NBA. Very, very few players are All-Stars from the minute they hit the league. Everyone still has things to work on when they start playing pros. It's really hard to project what kind of player an 18-year old kid will be in 5 years without seeing him play a single college game. You get a little more data seeing them play against college players, but you still have huge misses both ways. Your development after you get to the league is the real difference between a bust and a star most of the time. We've seen numerous guys come right out of high school and go on to have great careers, some of them even playing reasonably well as rookies, so more years in college isn't a prerequisite for success.

 

This is getting off point a bit though. It would obviously help the NCAA because they would get guys like Parker and Wiggins generating money for them for an extra year. It would help more college players than it would hurt because you'd have fewer poor decisions regarding the draft and some guys would improve their stock/be more ready after an extra year. It would help the existing NBA players because fewer guys that can threaten their jobs would be able to enter the draft pool.

 

However, I don't see why the league would want the rule. Execs want as many guys in the draft pool as possible to make choices, and the league has to wait an extra year to get the hyped up stud that can sell tickets. There are also a handful of guys every year that won't gain much from staying in school, with things possibly going horribly wrong. What kind of shape would Nerlens Noel be in right now if he were forced to stay? He's making $3.1 million while rehabbing now instead of sitting out likely the entire college season and hoping for the best.

 

I agree with most of your points and don't have an answer as to why the NBA wants the rule beyond what I've offered. I do think the NBA cares about players receiving an education, albeit only to a certain extent. A smaller talent pool would leave executives with fewer options, but it would also reduce the number of mistakes as the risk of drafting a player who wasn't ready for the NBA would be smaller- although it's worth pointing out that a smaller draft pool could result in a player being selected higher than he may be otherwise, thus creating a scenario in which he's paid more than he's worth due to a lack of depth in the pool- averting situations similar to Cleveland's selection of Anthony Bennett.

 

In the case of someone like Jabari Parker, however, I think the NBA would rather he enter the league as quickly as possible because he's likely to make an immediate impact due to his ability to score the basketball. Parker's grasp of fundamentals surpasses that of most players his age and may enable him to be successful in situations in which individuals with far less polish have struggled. As you've observed, he would have opportunities to improve as an NBA player, chances that may elude him at the collegiate level if he remains beyond his freshman season. Be that as it may, the one-and-done approach isn't for every player: perhaps NBA executives have decided it's not their job to babysit younger players, though I don't know what difference one year will make for a young man's maturity level.

 

--Captain Decker

 

[Brian]

Beat the Gages!

[Chisoxfn]

I don't get why they would want to do it. What benefit does the league get from pushing it to 2 years in college? So now you're giving the NCAA two years of superstar players when teams would draft the guy out of high school if they could? I get not wanting to scout high school players, but I just don't see the point in forcing dominant freshmen to stay another year. The only argument I could see is more development, but 99% of guys aren't "ready" for the NBA when they come out regardless of when they come out and guys that stay an extra year frequently see their stock drop.

 

I could also see that creating a ton of eligibility issues for guys that barely get in as it is. It will also cause guys to look at the D-League and Europe as alternatives.

 

Oh, and to answer your question, I would guess it comes up the next time they have to negotiate a CBA with the players.

You might get more development and a better quality of NBA. The actual skill level in the NBA has decreased significantly. Athletically, its another story. I've always argued the MLB approach, you allow them to go pro out of high school or they stay 2-3 years in college and continue to develop their game and then re-enter the draft.

[Chisoxfn]

Beat the Gages!

My expectations have been dropped a lot. Unfortunately. But lets go Hawks!!!

[Heads22]

Both Michigan and Iowa are quite beatable. Just move the game to Ames.

[RockRaines]

My expectations have been dropped a lot. Unfortunately. But lets go Hawks!!!

So it WAS a little early to call them national title caliber?

[whitesoxfan99]

You might get more development and a better quality of NBA. The actual skill level in the NBA has decreased significantly. Athletically, its another story. I've always argued the MLB approach, you allow them to go pro out of high school or they stay 2-3 years in college and continue to develop their game and then re-enter the draft.

 

I'd like to see any evidence whatsoever that players skill sets increase more at the college level than at the NBA level. That argument is a bunch of non-sense.

[Balta1701]

I'd like to see any evidence whatsoever that players skill sets increase more at the college level than at the NBA level. That argument is a bunch of non-sense.

I think it's much more that I don't want to watch guys who should be in a minor league physically up against NBA-level players.

[Brian]

This game blows. Beilien has to be thinking of starting Irvin over Robinson.

[Willard Decker]

I'd like to see any evidence whatsoever that players skill sets increase more at the college level than at the NBA level. That argument is a bunch of non-sense.

 

I don't question that a player's skill-set improves more rapidly at the NBA level. What I question is whether said skill-set is appropriate for the NBA when a given player enters the league, an issue that may be better addressed if players remain at the collegiate level for another season. I would imagine that the jump from NCAA to NBA would remain difficult, but perhaps any flaws inherent in a player's game would be less obvious with another season of experience.

 

--Captain Decker

 

[fathom]

Solid game for Melvin Ejim

[LittleHurt05]

Solid game for Melvin Ejim

 

71.1 Fanduel points! Of course I didn't roster him

[ZoomSlowik]

You might get more development and a better quality of NBA. The actual skill level in the NBA has decreased significantly. Athletically, its another story. I've always argued the MLB approach, you allow them to go pro out of high school or they stay 2-3 years in college and continue to develop their game and then re-enter the draft.

I have two issues there...

 

1) This rule really only affects around a half a dozen guys a year (maybe less in some years). It's not going to impact 99% of the players in the field. The guys it might affect are generally going to be the most "ready" of the field.

 

2) Getting high school guys out of the draft was a good thing. Only LeBron was really good immediately and only a few others were capable rotation players. The jump is just too big and scouting is damn near impossible since they outclass their competition so thoroughly. Going back to the days where Byron Mullens would go in the top 5 doesn't help anyone.

Edited February 9, 2014 by ZoomSlowik

[Buehrle>Wood]

I hate that Bruce Weber will go to the tournament with a lot less talented team than John Groce, who sits in last place

Edited February 9, 2014 by Buehrle>Wood

[whitesoxfan99]

I hate that Bruce Weber will go to the tournament with a lot less talented team than John Groce, who sits in last place

 

Kansas State is more talented than Illinois and I don't think its close. I don't care that Illinois has more top 100 players because Egwu is f***ing terrible and two of the other 3 top 100 players on Illinois are freshmen. Gipson is vastly superior to any big man on Illinois and Foster is easily the best guard on either team. Weber somehow actually finding Foster is going to keep Kansas St. a decent team as long as Foster is still in school. Illinois should be better than they are but the only teams in the Big 10 they have more talent than this year are Northwestern, Nebraska and Penn St. And even then when you have no big men who can rebound and no guards who can shoot it is tough to win games. My concern with Groce is that his teams have not been great defensively going back to his time at Ohio. Part of the problem at Illinois has been that it is really tough to be great defensively when you can't rebound but I do have concerns there.

Edited February 9, 2014 by whitesoxfan99

[Kyyle23]

Anthony Beane is just on fire. Salukis about to win their 4th in a row

[Heads22]

Solid game for Melvin Ejim

 

If you consider 48 points and 18 boards solid, I guess

[Brian]

Anthony Beane is just on fire. Salukis about to win their 4th in a row

 

No Thursdays

[Heads22]

And Marcus Smart goes into the stand and shoves a fan

[Chisoxfn]

So it WAS a little early to call them national title caliber?

They could beat anyone but they can't put it all together at times. And just cause I said they could bear anyone doesn't mean I'm saying they are the best. They aren't the best in the big ten. I was surprised when some analysts had them as national title contenders but hey 8 hope somehow they were right.

[Willard Decker]

And Marcus Smart goes into the stand and shoves a fan

 

Having seen video of the incident, the fan clearly said something to Smart to provoke him. I'm not condoning what Smart did- as there's nothing that justifies an athlete shoving a fan- but if the fan in question said something particularly vulgar or derogatory, he deserves banishment from future Texas Tech sporting events. As an aside, I'm not Marcus Smart's biggest fan, but I wonder how this may impact his draft position if he's suspended for a significant length of time.

 

--Captain Decker