forums

OT: NBA needs to get rid of the '1 and done' rule..

Advertisement
MISTER OWL said:
I believe the One and done rule was implemented because so many kids were going pro out of high school and not making it. So, then they were just sh*t out of luck without the ability to get an education. There were some pretty grim horror stories of these kids who went pro and busted.
Click to expand...
So in your mind, 4 months of college ball is going to far increase the success rate? I don't think so. Every year we still have more underclassmen declaring for the NBA draft then spots avail. It's going to happen regardless. 1 yr IMO makes no difference. Guys like AD, Zion, Kyrie, Tatum, etc would have the same success out of high school as they had with 1 semester of college. On the flip side, some guys go to college 4 yrs and don't make it. I think the one and done is dumb. If a high school kid wants to bypass college and go for it, it's the chance they take. I get it, for every KG there is a Korlene Young... My argument is for the kid that does 1 semester in college and goes pro and then doesn't make it... Then what?
 
DMoney said:
It’s better for the NBA. The quality of play has gone up now that GMs get a better evaluation. The HS era was terrible. For every LeBron, there are three Darius Miles.

That’s a separate issue than whether it’s fair or not. But the league needs to what’s best for the league. The healthier the game is, the better off the players are as a whole.
Click to expand...
This is a reach. Quality of play? The league might be more exciting to ppl now because it’s more fast pace, more 3pt shooting, and global but let’s not act like the whole league was high schoolers. The early 2000s was the iverson, Kobe, tmac, Vince carter, shaq years. Could go on with the star players that were in the league during that span. The game is just different. I think the way the game is played now actually fit the high school players better. One season of college basketball is not developing them into so much better players. Most of the time they are playing against ppl who won’t sniff the league.
 
SC-Cane said:
This is a reach. Quality of play? The league might be more exciting to ppl now because it’s more fast pace, more 3pt shooting, and global but let’s not act like the whole league was high schoolers. The early 2000s was the iverson, Kobe, tmac, Vince carter, shaq years. Could go on with the star players that were in the league during that span. The game is just different. I think the way the game is played now actually fit the high school players better. One season of college basketball is not developing them into so much better players. Most of the time they are playing against ppl who won’t sniff the league.
Click to expand...
Even if one agrees that the quality of play has gone up, it has little to do with forcing players to go to College for one year. It has more to do with the myriad of rule changes making it harder to play defense and the way the game is called nowadays.

I'm not sure how College would've made Lebron or Kobe any better, just as I'm sure College helped Kevin Durant or Anthony Davis.
 
Advertisement
We are a capitalist society, once you’re 18 you’re an adult and have to make adult decisions. Those decisions have consequences. If they want to go pro let them.
 
SC-Cane said:
This is a reach. Quality of play? The league might be more exciting to ppl now because it’s more fast pace, more 3pt shooting, and global but let’s not act like the whole league was high schoolers. The early 2000s was the iverson, Kobe, tmac, Vince carter, shaq years. Could go on with the star players that were in the league during that span. The game is just different. I think the way the game is played now actually fit the high school players better. One season of college basketball is not developing them into so much better players. Most of the time they are playing against ppl who won’t sniff the league.
Click to expand...

Quality of play has gone up because the evaluation process is more efficient. That's the reason we have the one-and-done rule-- to help evaluators.

It's hard to accurately pick high school players. It's easier when you have a year of college evaluation. The more efficient the evaluation process, the less busts you have on the floor. Early 2000s basketball was littered overmatched high school players fumbling around the court. They had to play early because they were picked too high.

Now, the draft is better, the skill level is better and the league is better. The rule worked.

I don't really care about fairness. It's unfair that LeBron James was born with his genes. For every high school player who gets into the league early, a fringe player is pushed out. It's a zero sum game.

All I care about is the talent level. The one-and-done rule has greatly improved the talent level, which was the point.
 
supersaiyanshel said:
Even if one agrees that the quality of play has gone up, it has little to do with forcing players to go to College for one year. It has more to do with the myriad of rule changes making it harder to play defense and the way the game is called nowadays.

I'm not sure how College would've made Lebron or Kobe any better, just as I'm sure College helped Kevin Durant or Anthony Davis.
Click to expand...
How are you so sure? I get what your saying horrible examples. Those two would’ve been who they were without it. Kyrie played college b-ball for a month how much better did he get? College helps develop players like Russell Westbrook, Paul George, kawhai leonard, Damian lillard, steph who are more unknown prospects coming and maybe haven’t developed physically all the way. The top kids already play with nba players during the summer so it’s nothing to them
 
Advertisement
SC-Cane said:
How are you so sure? I get what your saying horrible examples. Those two would’ve been who they were without it. Kyrie played college b-ball for a month how much better did he get? College helps develop players like Russell Westbrook, Paul George, kawhai leonard, Damian lillard, steph who are more unknown prospects coming and maybe haven’t developed physically all the way. The top kids already play with nba players during the summer so it’s nothing to them
Click to expand...
Without question, but most of those guys you listed werent candidates to jump straight to the pros and I'm sure none of them considered it.

College Ball definitely has it's place and is valuable in development. Im just talking about those rare freaks. They should not be forced to play pretend student for a year.
 
DMoney said:
Quality of play has gone up because the evaluation process is more efficient. That's the reason we have the one-and-done rule-- to help evaluators.

It's hard to accurately pick high school players. It's easier when you have a year of college evaluation. The more efficient the evaluation process, the less busts you have on the floor. Early 2000s basketball was littered overmatched high school players fumbling around the court. They had to play early because they were picked too high.

Now, the draft is better, the skill level is better and the league is better. The rule worked.

I don't really care about fairness. It's unfair that LeBron James was born with his genes. For every high school player who gets into the league early, a fringe player is pushed out. It's a zero sum game.

All I care about is the talent level. The one-and-done rule has greatly improved the talent level, which was the point.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say anything about fairness. Who are all the high school players that were so overmatched? Yea there were high school bust then but it’s proly been a whole bunch of college bust during the span too. The players in the league in the early 2000s played much longer than they do now so they were older. Teams were filled with old players then. You are exaggerating the amount of hs players in the league during that time. You like the game more now. I just recently watched an interview with KD where he said he liked the game more when he first came into the league than now. The game was way more technical then than it is now. It’s more free flowing and up and down which brings excitement not quality. You think going to watch the heat play against the suns is quality basketball? Or watching the wizards play the knicks is quality? The talent level is better because the pool of players is bigger. More international players than ever in the League
 
Last edited:
Captain Uberpants said:
We are a capitalist society, once you’re 18 you’re an adult and have to make adult decisions. Those decisions have consequences. If they want to go pro let them.
Click to expand...
Exactly. If the Knicks want to draft some kid who’s 18 it’s their right. Heck, even a 16 year old can work at McDonalds. If the Lakers want to draft some kid who’s got tons of potential and develop him for a couple of years, it’s their option.

If someone’s willing to give you millions of dollars, let em.

It’s happened in baseball for decades.

Go Canes!
 
When you think about it there is NO reason other than the interests of Universities to make $$ from the efforts of these young men for this stupid rule.

Tennis, baseball and golf players are not restricted from earning $$$ whenever they so choose ONLY because Universities cannot generate Big $$ from these lightly ( by comparison ) attended sports
 
Advertisement
There is no justifiable reason for one-and-done. And very little justification for the continued existence of the NCAA as currently embodied.

Who really benefits, or benefits the most, from Zion Williamson having to go to Duke for one year?
  1. Duke University
  2. Nike
  3. Television Networks
  4. The NBA
  5. The NCAA
Its a market inefficiency protected and perpetuated by the above with assistance from state and federal government.
 
I think what Lavar Ball is/was trying to do with that league for players that didn’t go to college is a good alternative if run correctly
 
DMoney said:
It’s better for the NBA. The quality of play has gone up now that GMs get a better evaluation. The HS era was terrible. For every LeBron, there are three Darius Miles.

That’s a separate issue than whether it’s fair or not. But the league needs to what’s best for the league. The healthier the game is, the better off the players are as a whole.
Click to expand...

You're being way too kind. For Every one LBJ there were at least five Darius Miles. The jump from HS was terrible, and to be honest, the one and done are taking a while to develop, as well.

KD came in and took the league by storm; but even Anthony Davis, Boogie Cousins, Russell Westbrook, Victor O, and now Brandon Ingram took a couple of years to show their mantle. For every KD, there's a Michael Beasley, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Austin Rivers, Greg Olden, Marvin Williams, Ben McLemore, Xavier Henry, Tyrus Thomas, Noah Vonleh, Lonzo Ball, Jahlil Okafor, Tyus Jones, Eddie Griffin, Rodney White, D Wagner, DerMarr Johnson, and of course Anthony Bennett.

The NBA was much better when guys were seasoned coming in to the league vs. us watching high schoolers and one and dones waiting to develop. Everyone can't be a LBJ or KD.
 
Advertisement
HurricaneU said:
There is no justifiable reason for one-and-done. And very little justification for the continued existence of the NCAA as currently embodied.

Who really benefits, or benefits the most, from Zion Williamson having to go to Duke for one year?
  1. Duke University
  2. Nike
  3. Television Networks
  4. The NBA
  5. The NCAA
Its a market inefficiency protected and perpetuated by the above with assistance from state and federal government.
Click to expand...

I don't agree w/ you at all. How many guys that left high school and came straight to the NBA actually lived up to the hype? How many of those guys remained in the leauge past 5 yrs? How many one and dones have lived up to the hype?

Now compare that to the guys who either played professionally over in Europe since the age of 15 or the guys who stayed at least 2 years in college. Its not a coincidence guys like Donovan Mitchell and Dennis Smith Jr came NBA ready, while Lonzo Ball, D'Aaron Fox, Fultz, Josh Jackson, Malik Monk, Harry Giles, Tony Bradley all struggled. I'm sorry, but the NBA lost a lot of popularity during those baby sitting years. It was a **** poor product. It take 98% of these one and done players a min of 3 yrs to reach their NBA maturity, which coincides with the glory years of the NBA...guys staying in school 3 to 4 years.
 
supersaiyanshel said:
Let's not discount the role NBA Gms had in all these high school busts as well. Go back and look at Kwame Brown's draft class and look at some of the guys that went before him.

These guys need to do their homework better.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but seeing a guy like Kwame, 18 yrs old, dominating high school (albeit weak comp)....of course people were going to drool over him. Andrew Bynum, same thing.
 
jjacks93 said:
I think what Lavar Ball is/was trying to do with that league for players that didn’t go to college is a good alternative if run correctly
Click to expand...

LaVar is an idiot. How about he help his boys first. These kids need to go over to Europe if they don't want to go to college. My homie Stace went to SC then went to Europe and came back to US and was this close to making the Houston Rockets (he really should've made the roster, but was passed over for their draft pick). He said it was the best thing he ever did...said them boys over in Europe can play and it's grown men.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top