Adam Silver wants to blow up the NBA's age-limit rule
Well I guess the question is, do you raise it to 20 years old or just get rid of the rule and allow HS players to enter the draft? I would assume NCAA is hoping for the 2 year rule. Players Union I would think would be in favor of rule being abolished? Not sure how I feel. Would obviously alter NCAA recruiting no matter what the results ends up being.
From reading the article it sounds like they may want to raise it. They talk about players not being prepared which would lead me to think they would like them to stay longer in college.
Here is how you get both sides of the argument in one agreement. You implement a system like MLB has for the draft. You allow high school player to enter the draft. If drafted they go to the NBA. If not, they go to the college that they committed to and are there for 2-3 years. MLB is a 3 year wait, but NBA could do 2. It would improve college basketball because a coach knows that the kid will be on campus for 2 years minimum. Also allows the NBA to get the Andrew Wiggins/Jabari Parker/Ben Simmons type players into the League right away.
If they do it it should be 3 years just like football and baseball. but I could care less the NBA is not basketball its a circus. I tried to watch it last night and made it till there was 5 travels so I lasted about 5 mins of game time lol
Agree on all this.
The baseball model is a good rule for the sports but I lean towards a market/demand/free to work stance. If there is a demand for giving a player roster spot, why prevent anyone from doing anything? It seems wrong to have control over whether someone is allowed to work at a job for which an employer wants to hire the person.
I wonder if the players' union would really be on board for no age restrictions though. There would be a lot of higher value veteran contracts eliminated from the league in favor of younger, low cost players. I think the NBA would turn into a league of high priced stars and low cost young players with only a handful of complimentary vets. But maybe that's the way of the sports world and society as a whole these days.
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
This has some merit to me. However, if a high school kid is drafted, the team should have to offer a 3 year deal, with some reasonable minimum. Then the player can choose and the team is on the hook for bad decisions.
Last edited:
I would prefer anything other than one and done. Its stupid for everyone involved. Freshman year of college holds almost zero value.
My favorite option (being a college basketball fan) would be to force kids to get a degree to play in the NBA. I guess you can add in another option of playing in other pro leagues for 3/4 years first, but I think its ridiculous these kids get a free ride then waste it on hopes of making it big. At the very least I agree with the other posters that a football type rule is a good option.
At the very least I think they need to bump it up a year. Or abolish it. Either force a decent amount of time in college on them, or give the kids free reign. The current rule makes almost no sense.
My favorite option (being a college basketball fan) would be to force kids to get a degree to play in the NBA. I guess you can add in another option of playing in other pro leagues for 3/4 years first, but I think its ridiculous these kids get a free ride then waste it on hopes of making it big. At the very least I agree with the other posters that a football type rule is a good option.
At the very least I think they need to bump it up a year. Or abolish it. Either force a decent amount of time in college on them, or give the kids free reign. The current rule makes almost no sense.
MLB has totally different dynamics than basketball with their minor league system and tradition. That MLB rule will not directly help NBA owners and would be totally opposed by the NBA players' union. It is very clear that the players' union is pushing in the opposite direction. Improving college basketball will not be a focus in those discussions.
I am not sure how people are reading differently, but it is pretty easy to see that the article implies completely getting rid of the rule, plus adding a small safety net to a few select HS players by creating an intermediate NBDL salary category that will decrease the backlash of HS players ending up in no man's land but limit the liability of NBA owners.
I agree with this. Otherwise teams will just draft potential bigs, park them in the D-league, and if they don't work out in a year or two, release them.
Ah, the old, 'save us from ourselves issue.' Owners want cheap labor, but if forced to pay a market wage, they pay more than they want to.
This will go the way many union issues go: the existing senior members will use it as a bargaining chip that screws the next generation of members. So far they haven't figured out the right way to do it. I'm sure they will.
This will go the way many union issues go: the existing senior members will use it as a bargaining chip that screws the next generation of members. So far they haven't figured out the right way to do it. I'm sure they will.
The players union won't want it lowered, they don't represent high school kids, they represent the current highly paid older players who would be put of out a job by the younger cheaper talent.
I'd raise it to 20. Gives the kids an associates degree (or the potential to have one if they go to class their 2nd year) but still lets them earn in their prime.
Well actually, ideally, I'd let the high school kids (or any year of college kids) enter and potentially get drafted, then choose if they want to go to the team that drafted them or go to college, kind of like the MLB. Just don't think that will happen.
The NBA should abolish the age limit, expand the draft to 3 or 4 rounds, and then turn the D-League into a more robust minor league system. Something akin to hockey's or baseball's. Probably should add something like baseball's 25 and 40 man rosters. (13 and 18?) It would be more expensive for the NBA, but would give them alot more control over the player development process.
The NCAA should respond by changing their eligibility rules to be more like baseball, which allows drafted players to retain their eligibility if they don't sign with the pro team. They might lose 15-20 top tier players a year, but would probably get a half dozen or so just-under-top-tier players back who to this point have been declaring for the draft and not getting picked in the first round.
The NCAA should respond by changing their eligibility rules to be more like baseball, which allows drafted players to retain their eligibility if they don't sign with the pro team. They might lose 15-20 top tier players a year, but would probably get a half dozen or so just-under-top-tier players back who to this point have been declaring for the draft and not getting picked in the first round.
As it stands now players 10-12 barely see the light of day and you want to expand that?
I think both college and NBA would benefit from removing the rule... let the kids go straight to NBA or other professional options that want to, otherwise kids stay 3. They are going to increase the pay and invest more in NBADL in the next CBA so won't make it as bad of an option.
There is no market for it, especially in the presence of college basketball. College basketball is one of the two major revenue sports, college baseball is not, in the presence of minor league baseball. Minor league baseball has tradition and infrastructure, NBDL does not get crowds and the average salary is 16K.
If NBDL turns into minor league baseball, it means that college basketball declines, but the odds are that college basketball will be the winner in this battle. There have been multiple efforts for additional leagues, like minor pro-leagues (e.g., CBA) or alternatives like the ABA, but they all failed. Same with football (e.g., USFL). The business cases do not close.
First round choices already have minimum three or four year deals.
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
I thought so, but the second round is a crap shoot. I think drafting someone should come with a commitment.
You are looking at it though from a college basketball fan's standpoint, as many of the other comments on this thread. So if the owners want to draft a HS kid, it should come with a high risk and financial commitment attached. Yet, the major party in these negotiations are the owners. They want to do the exact opposite, minimize the risk, that is why they instituted a rookie salary cap with only first round guaranteed to begin with.
College basketball fans will not be on the negotiating table, but the owners will be. On the other end of the table will be the players' union, which have traditionally opposed restrictions on players wanting to turn pro. So locking a player for 2-3 years in college will not get their support.
kcib8130
- Parts Unknown
Get rid of the rule and go back to how it was. It doesn't seem right to hold a kid to a contract in college to make him stay 3 years. that would be suppressing his right to work if a kid blew up in year 2, but told him you have to stay another year.
Can you imagine Swanigan staying another year? what would he have to gain from that? He stock is at it's highest now. The downside is if he got hurt next year he would lose significant money from what he could get his year.
Can you imagine Swanigan staying another year? what would he have to gain from that? He stock is at it's highest now. The downside is if he got hurt next year he would lose significant money from what he could get his year.
Silver's been saying this for many years, so far all it's been is talk. IBIWISI.
You mean like football?
Owners wanted the rules changed originally because they were taking on considerable risk when drafting a kid straight out of high school. The union would certainly like to go back to the original rule. Like anything, there probably has to be some kind of middle ground and the only way those young kids are truly going to be represented is by filing suit because the owners are not interested in the risk and the union is more concerned with the guys in the NBA than they are with young kids that may or may not make it.
kcib8130
- Parts Unknown
That risk is there regardless of how long they stay in college or how dominant they are. Maurice Clarett should have gotten the chance to go pro after his freshman year, why should he be held to tOSU?
A player can be cut from his scholarship at any point for (really) any reason, how can we expect the players to stay for a set number of years right off the bat?
I agree there is a substantial risk in drafting a high school player, but the same thing can be said for some of the overseas players that get drafted, stay overseas, and never play for the team that drafted them and ultimately could lose all value that pick. The whole draft process is a risk.