The NBA Draft age limit has once again become a hot topic of discussion. Everyone agrees that the current system isn't working, but nobody can agree on what the solution should be, though. The owners want to raise the age limit to 20. The Union wants it lowered to 18. The only thing they agree on is that the one-and-done culture doesn't help anything.
Even the big-time college coaches are speaking out against the current rules. John Calipari, who has benefited the most from one-and-dones, said he wouldn't be opposed to a change where players can once again enter the NBA directly out of high school. Mike Krzyzewski has never been a big fan of the one-and-done (although Jahlil Okafor did win him a National Championship in his only year at Duke). He'd like to see something similar to the "baseball rule."
Except here's why the "baseball rule" wouldn't work in basketball. In baseball, you're not taking these guys that you draft out of high school and putting them directly in the Major League. Most draft picks, no matter how old they are, start in either Rookie or Short-Season A ball. For the most part, it's going to take at least three years for even the most polished prospects to reach the Majors. Even guys who are drafted out of college and are more developed will likely spend at least a year or two in the Minors.
In basketball, there's no built-in development system like there is in baseball. Sure, you have the D-League, but players who declare for the draft don't want to play in the D-League. The money and the exposure simply aren't there. Until they are (or until the D-League becomes an actual development system), that's not a viable option. So you either have to pay these guys ridiculous amounts of money to sit on the bench or leave them undrafted.
By the "baseball rule," Coach K may be referring to draft eligibility. In baseball, you have the opportunity to get drafted twice (three times actually). You can get drafted out of high school. If you sign, that's it. If you don't sign and go to college, you have to wait three years before you can be drafted again after your junior season (the third time would be after your senior year, when you don't have any options left).
It's also three years in the NFL. You don't have to play three years of college football, but you have to be out of high school three years in order to be eligible for the draft. This has been the case in the NFL (which has no development league) for years, and, with the exception of a few challenges, nobody really seems to have an issue with it. Even though the average football career doesn't even last four years.
Hockey's format is unique, and it might be the model that would work best for basketball. If you take a look at a college hockey roster, you'll see a ton of NHL logos or abbreviations on it. That's because NHL teams retain a player's rights until 30 days after he leaves college. So, that player can choose to go to college without having to worry about how it'll effect his draft status.
And college hockey is a great development system, so it makes sense that they'll want to play there (while getting a free education) instead of in Juniors or the AHL. We've also seen plenty of examples where players sign right after their college season ends and immediately make it to the NHL. Chris Kreider went right from Boston College to the Rangers, making his NHL debut in the 2012 playoffs and scoring five goals before ever playing in a regular season game. Then this year there was a guy who scored for the Wild in his NHL debut the day after playing in North Dakota's NCAA Tournament loss.
That system makes a lot of sense, and there's no reason why something similar couldn't be implemented in the NBA. I'm not saying it would work if you tried to do it the same way because it definitely wouldn't. But there are definitely elements of the NHL format that would work.
I think some sort of hybrid between the NHL and MLB methods could be the solution. Maybe you drop the year in college requirement to be drafted, but at the same time tell players that they're free to both sign an NLI and declare for the draft. If they're a LeBron-like talent and the team that drafts them feels they can cut in the NBA right away, they're free to sign. Otherwise, they have the option of taking that scholarship and playing in college for two years while the NBA team that drafted them retains their rights.
Everyone wins in this scenario. The risk for the NBA teams is much less. The college coaches know that if they do get a guy, they have him for at least two years, making it a lot easier on them in recruiting. And for the players, they have a couple of options. They can sign and make money right away or go to college and know they have an NBA job waiting for them. In fact, this might incentivize more guys to play college basketball, which would improve that product exponentially.
Is this the right answer? I don't know. Is there a right answer? Maybe not. But nobody seems to like the current system and something needs to be done. And I don't see anybody else offering suggestions for how to fix it.
No comments:
Post a Comment