11/05/24
April 07, 2010
Five from Kentucky declare for NBA draft: Four freshmen and one junior express their interest in entering the NBA draft.
posted by jjzucal to basketball at 07:48 PM - 10 comments
Yet these top programs still seem to get the better players. BTW, how many of these players will withdraw after they realize they have no chance of getting drafted?
posted by jjzucal at 09:28 PM on April 07, 2010
jjzucal
they may be all first rounders, which would mean potentially turning down the big payday. Based on ability from what I've seen, Bledsoe and Orton should reconsider.
posted by bluemagpie at 11:21 PM on April 07, 2010
This is why the "One and Done" rule should be eliminated. I feel that the baseball requirement that a player not be eligible until after their junior season is the way to go. The only problem is that in baseball the players are eligible out of high school too, and I don't particularly like that either. The high school eligibility works for baseball only because of their minor league system, the D-League is no where near that level yet. I would prefer to see these kids have to stay in school for at least 3 years, which means that they must also remain academically eligible for 3 years before coming out.
Here is an idea that I would like to float for a potential NBA draft eligibility system. I haven't worked out solutions to all of the scenarios yet, but this is a rough outline.
Players would be eligible to have their draft rights selected out of high school, but they would not be allowed to sign until after their sophomore seasons. After their sophomore season (academic sophomore year, meaning they must have attained the required number of credit hours that at the completion of the current semester they would become an academic junior), they would be allowed to have a representative (a lawyer or some other adviser, but not an agent) negotiate a deal with the team that drafted them. Should the player not be able to reach a deal with a team, they would retain their eligibility and return for their junior season and return to the draft should they choose to enter again after their junior year.
Players who are not selected coming out of high school would not be eligible to enter the draft again until the completion of their junior seasons. I would also tie the definition of junior year for both class of players as being completion of their academic junior year, so that at the completion of the current semester they would become academic seniors.
posted by Demophon at 08:46 AM on April 08, 2010
Why should players have to go to college at all? There is a track record of high school players successfully making the jump to the NBA. I think that the rules for baseball would work very well for basketball. Players good enough to enter the draft out of high school should be allowed to do so. Those who need further development should make a bigger commitment to the schools and attend for 3 years.
I'm curious, which entity (players, NCAA, or NBA) is the one that is pushing for the one-and-done rule? I assume it's the NBA, but I don't really see how it serves anyone.
posted by bender at 10:10 AM on April 08, 2010
The rule that required the one year was implemented by the NBA. It helps to reduce some of the risk that a team takes by taking a high school player in the draft because they will have faced at least one year of higher competition that is most likely close to their own athletic talents. With high school players, the best player on the court is usually far and away the best player. At the D1 college level you are matching up against other guys who were always the best player on the court.
I don't like the one and done rule because I think it hurts the NCAA game because you see that only certain teams will get these one year players who will only attend the big schools for the exposure they get by playing for the big schools. Fans don't get to develop an affinity for the players because they are gone after one year and the schools take on the risk that a scandal could do their academic reputations if these players don't play by the rules, that they have little incentive to actually follow since they know they will be gone in less than a year anyways.
I think that the players should have to go to the NBA because for each LeBron, Kobe and KG that went straight to the NBA and found success you have busts like Kwame Brown, Jonathan Bender, Darius Miles, Leon Smith and Sebastian Telfair who didn't posses the maturity or talent to handle the NBA. There is no guarantee these guys would have faired any better with some college time under their belts, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt. Worst case scenario they end up with an education.
posted by Demophon at 11:07 AM on April 08, 2010
I agree with you on your reasons for disliking the one-and-done rule. I don't like it either. (I cheer for a team-Ohio State-that has had a glut of one-year players in recent years--and some of them weren't even good enough to go pro after one year, anyway.) However, I don't see why players who are skilled enough to go straight to the NBA from college should be forced to go to college and miss out on being paid for 3 years.
And for every Kwame brown, Darius Miles, and Leon Smith, there's a Bryant Reeves, Adam Morrison, and Eric Montross. Every highly-rated player doesn't turn out to be a great NBA guy. Furthermore, going to the NBA doesn't prevent them from getting an education. If after a couple years it doesn't pan out, they can afford to go to college on that. Beside that, going to school for three years and leaving without a degree isn't worth that much. They'd still have to go back later to finish up. Might as well do it all in one shot.
Look, I like players going to school (and graduating), but if it's only because they have to (because they can't go straight to the NBA) and not because they want to, that doesn't serve either the player or the school.
posted by bender at 12:49 PM on April 08, 2010
Bledsoe and Orton are fools if they stay in the draft. Another year or 2 in college and they'd be high first rounders, this year they'll be lucky to get drafted at all.
Patterson is the player most ready for the NBA, his stock diminshed a bit this year because Calipari had him on the wing shooting 3's ... not really his strength (just as coaching isn't Calipari's).
Wall will start in the NBA next year based on raw talent alone but isn't ready to play point just yet.
Cousins was a man amongst boys in most college games and sometimes used that to his advantage. He's still very raw.
Expect 2 of these guys to go in the top 5.
posted by cixelsyd at 02:21 PM on April 08, 2010
Apparently the press release should have said Four, possibly five from Kentucky declare for NBA draft.
posted by Demophon at 08:56 AM on April 09, 2010
NFL has a 'third year after high school' draft eligibility rule now.
I think, though, that the USA is a free country and an 18 year old who can fight (and die) for his country should be able to choose whether he wants to attend college. Kids make mistakes all the time, I know I made some doozies.
Other difference from baseball drafting out of HS is that the percentage of such players stepping directly into an MLB lineup is vanishingly small. Baseball has the minors to provide the seasoning while still allowing top prospects to get paid (without the booster shenanigans and other hypocrisies of college ball).
posted by billsaysthis at 12:43 PM on April 09, 2010
Geno Auriemma, coach of the University of Connecticut women, was recently asked if the kind of dominance UConn (and several other women's teams) has had in the last decade is likely to continue. He said yes for a variety of reasons. One of the main reasons he gave was that women's basketball players tend to finish their college career while strong men's team can be decimated by the NBA draft.
(There were some other pragmatic reasons he gave as well that had to do with women's players vs men's players as opposed to because of the water in Storrs, Connecticut or what have you)
This sort of story tends to lend credence to Auriemma's theory. If every year is a rebuilding year, how do you get your program to the top level? I mean, besides by letting 100 teams into the NCAA Tournament.