Arrests coming due to college bball kickbacks

[Peacone36]

It's tinged in racist thinking. When folks are outraged about this but can't explain why they're ok with it for hockey/baseball players ... well, that's how ya know.

Because you're not racist, you give other people way too much credit.

And, of course, we all know @orientalnc is racist. I mean, really? "Oriental"? The proper term is 'Asian-American', bro.

At least he doesn’t call them Celestials

 

[kg01]

I don't think it's as simple as to pin in solely on the NBA's awful GMing. That league is full of bad GM's to this day.

They had the Malice in the Palace ... the dress code thing .. then the 1-and-done rule.

It's hard to explain through this without drifting into a political discussion.

Long story short, the league seemed to feel that it had an image problem. The 1-and-done rule was part of their attempts to fix it.

The byproduct was certainly that it gave them a sneak peak at prospects but it wasn't the impetus.

At least he doesn’t call them Celestials

We don't know that he doesn't.

 

[GTRX7]

I'm also all in favor of allowing kids to go straight out of HS. But it should be pared with a rule similar to baseball. You can go straight, but if you want to go to college than you have to go for either 2 or 3 yrs before becoming eligible again. I hope the NBA does beef up its D-League and allow it to become more of a true minor league system for those young men that really don't want to go to school and want to simply get paid and try to get to the league.

From a college sports fan perspective, I agree I like this idea. But why should it be the case? In no other area of life do we make rules like that. Devin Booker is a great example of a kid that was not really on anybody's one-and-done radar, but had a great freshman year and has been killing it in the NBA ever since. Just because he broke out his freshman year of college instead of his senior year of high school, why should he be effectively punished?

 

[ESPNjacket]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/secret-cash-isnt-an-ncaa-scandal-amateurism-is-1519665889

 

[glandon1960]

From a college sports fan perspective, I agree I like this idea. But why should it be the case? In no other area of life do we make rules like that. Devin Booker is a great example of a kid that was not really on anybody's one-and-done radar, but had a great freshman year and has been killing it in the NBA ever since. Just because he broke out his freshman year of college instead of his senior year of high school, why should he be effectively punished?

You're right in that no matter what the timeframe someone has to stay in college before being eligible for NBA draft - if it's more than 1 season there will be someone that breaks out that we'd all agree is ready to move on. Of course a kid could also sign to play and because of poor academics, off-court issues, etc be effectively off scholarship (or out of school) they next year.

I agree w/Red in that if you give players that pretty much intend to use NCAA basketball to get ready to go to NBA the ability to go straight to G-League it is a positive step ... works reasonably well for baseball - they get chance to play against strong talent - some others a year or two out of high school, some possibly people ththat have played 4 years in college.
Red is right in that the problem NBA had with players being drafted right out of high school for big bucks was the number of misses (for every Lebron there were way too many that were a bust) ... they do need to see kids play against others their size/speed/skill level to determine who can really make it in the NBA. Maybe the best (not perfect) answer is to require them to play 2 (or 3) years in college before NBA drafts them - and you're right that a small number of players will have been caught up in this one (and what options there are for those players needs to be laid out up front).

From my perch, the current 1 and done is not the best thing from the fans perspective - you have teams (UK, Duke, etc). basically recruiting mostly 1 and dones .... at UK is seems that if a player is not going pro by end of sophmore year - Calipari does not want to recruit them, or they are going to be buried on the end of the bench behind the next wave of potential NBA all star wanna-bes. Broader parity is good for college basketball - which is why March Madness is so good! Spreading the better players out a little farther would be good for the game.

 

[glandon1960]

The one thing I discussed with a friend which might effect what teams do with their recruits- is to limit the number of players they can sign. You already have a limit of 13 on scholarship max. If you extend that to say only sign a max of 16 every 4 years (16 was picked out of the air) - that makes schools think more on who they sign. You need to allow more than 13 in 4 years to allow for grad transfers, transfers, career ending injuries, kids leaving not related to going pro ... and kids going pro. This puts the onus on the coaching staff to think long term, develop players, etc.

Would Duke have gone after (at least) 4 kids they signed for this season that are likely 1 and done (at worst 1 might be a 2 and done)? ... and then 4 of the top 10 next year (want to bet at least 3, if not all 4, of them never play a junior year at Duke)?

 

[GTRX7]

The one thing I discussed with a friend which might effect what teams do with their recruits- is to limit the number of players they can sign. You already have a limit of 13 on scholarship max. If you extend that to say only sign a max of 16 every 4 years (16 was picked out of the air) - that makes schools think more on who they sign. You need to allow more than 13 in 4 years to allow for grad transfers, transfers, career ending injuries, kids leaving not related to going pro ... and kids going pro. This puts the onus on the coaching staff to think long term, develop players, etc.

Would Duke have gone after (at least) 4 kids they signed for this season that are likely 1 and done (at worst 1 might be a 2 and done)? ... and then 4 of the top 10 next year (want to bet at least 3, if not all 4, of them never play a junior year at Duke)?

That is an interesting idea that could be controlled and enforced by the NCAA without restricting any individual kid. I like that idea. I think you would have to have some sort of appeals process for exceptional circumstances, but I generally like this idea more than the "come for one, stay for two or three" rule.

On top of that, let kids get insurance (if need be by loan, which I think may already be permitted), and give kids a right to get repayable loans from agents up to a certain amount ($30k or something). Those changes collectively may have a really good impact on both the kids and the sport.

 

[ESPNjacket]

The Miller contract story was apparently not true:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...-not-get-more-money-if-fired-cause/371709002/

 

[Deleted member 2897]

USCe Coach Frank Martin: "I'm telling you, we're clean"

Yes, this is the SAME GUY who with open arms invited in a guy who was ineligible to play basketball because he had accepted $100,000 to go play at Louisville. If such a statement doesn't make you spit out your coffee, I don't know what would. What a maroon.

https://www.postandcourier.com/spor...cle_0c3aaa94-1b16-11e8-9b43-8b5b5ba36cf1.html

 

[kg01]

USCe Coach Frank Martin: "I'm telling you, we're clean"

Yes, this is the SAME GUY who with open arms invited in a guy who was ineligible to play basketball because he had accepted $100,000 to go play at Louisville. If such a statement doesn't make you spit out your coffee, I don't know what would. What a maroon.

https://www.postandcourier.com/spor...cle_0c3aaa94-1b16-11e8-9b43-8b5b5ba36cf1.html

Well, I mean, they didn't give him the money so ... technically ... "clean"? .... clean(ish)?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Well, I mean, they didn't give him the money so ... technically ... "clean"? .... clean(ish)?

Yea the irony is crazy. Especially given their coaches ties into this mess. They don't have a problem with someone else doing it, or someone else receiving it...just so long as it wasn't them (as far as we know). So what they're saying is that if an agent somewhere worked with an apparel company to give a player money but they didn't do it themselves, then everything is okay.

 

[slugboy]

The reason for the one and done rule was pretty simple. The NBA was making too many evaluation mistakes of kids coming out of HS. So they were paying alot of money to young people who weren't developing how they expected. Making them go to college allowed the NBA to watch them for a year and see how they play against higher level of competition in a competitive setting (not AAU games where there is little defense).

Kwame Brown is sort of the poster child for this. It's easy to look really good when you are so much bigger and more athletic than most of the players you are seen against. How do you do once you start playing against men closer to your abilities. Basically making the kids go to college for a year allowed the NBA to watch the kids against better competition and legit defenses allowing them to make fewer evaluation mistakes and waste less money.

I'm also all in favor of allowing kids to go straight out of HS. But it should be pared with a rule similar to baseball. You can go straight, but if you want to go to college than you have to go for either 2 or 3 yrs before becoming eligible again. I hope the NBA does beef up its D-League and allow it to become more of a true minor league system for those young men that really don't want to go to school and want to simply get paid and try to get to the league.

Adam Silver in his PC before the All-Star game last week did suggest doing away with the one and done rule may be farther off through than college coaches thought. He suggested it may not be changed until the next time the collective bargaining agreement is up - which is 2023, though most think it could happen before then.

The NBA (and the NFL, and MLB, and so on) are making plenty of talent evaluation mistakes. Are they significantly worse evaluating the high school players than the college sophomores?

I don't even have to go back to the Billy Knight era to see strange talent evaluation decisions in ATLANTA. I've seen some over the last few years.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The NBA (and the NFL, and MLB, and so on) are making plenty of talent evaluation mistakes. Are they significantly worse evaluating the high school players than the college sophomores?

I don't even have to go back to the Billy Knight era to see strange talent evaluation decisions in ATLANTA. I've seen some over the last few years.

Yea I don't see the problem. Its America. If they pay someone $5M and then turn out to be total crap, that's the NBA team's fault. If that player gets cut, they should be set for life with that money. They can always go back to school too.

If a bank loans money to someone who can't repay it, they lose the money. I don't see the big deal. I've been working for 25 years since Tech (wow I'm old). I see people get hired and fired all the time whose employment doesn't work out for a variety of reasons. If a kid doesn't want to go to college because they've built up a huge lawn mowing business and want to see if they can turn it into a real enterprise, so be it. Maybe it works out, maybe it doesn't.

 

[YlJacket]

The NBA (and the NFL, and MLB, and so on) are making plenty of talent evaluation mistakes. Are they significantly worse evaluating the high school players than the college sophomores?

I don't even have to go back to the Billy Knight era to see strange talent evaluation decisions in ATLANTA. I've seen some over the last few years.

The key point in Red's post is that the teams are pushing back on Silver's desire to do away with the one and done for exactly the reason they are worried about $5m mistakes. Doesn't mean they won't make mistakes even with a year in college but they believe they will make less mistakes - and with that they can override the Commish's desire to change the rule. Add in that teams in reality don't want to have to start going to AAU tourneys to scout players when they now have college games with high end film systems that they can use to do their assessments rather than POS gyms scattered all over hell's half acre with no real film system for backup. Beyond the extra year of training, competition and learning to live away from home - that is a huge problem/imposition/PIA for the GMs and scouts to have to deal with to get their assessments done on these guys. They have already been stretched to have to go to Europe and other overseas locations to scout and IMHO they are saying they don't want to add AAU gyms.

My own opinion - while Silver is pointing to the next CBA as a place for change, I don't think the players union is the real impediment here. They will want their pound of flesh in any negotiation but I think the teams themselves are the big impediment - and that means it may well not get changed in a CBA or anywhere. They like it the way it is and likely think the implications to the college game don't affect or concern them.

 

[kg01]

@YlJacket have there been reports of teams against eliminating the rule? Just curious. I hadn't seen anything either way.

And I think the players assoc could indeed be an impediment. Remember, they typically don't care about guys who aren't NBA clients. These prospective HS players, if allowed in, will be cheap(ish) and will be taking higher-paying jobs away from guys who are likely the managing members of the players assoc.

 

[YlJacket]

There were reports/articles about NBA teams not really excited about taking away the one year they get to see kids in college and not excited about evaluating in AAU/HS gyms. More of the former but a couple of the latter. At least that I recall and I didn't save them. A lot of the articles about mistakes came out when they went to the one and done but there have been ones since.

I have no illusion that the players association won't want something for the change. Or that the voice of LeBron who was before one and done is different than the "rank and file" guy who is trying to hang on to his #9 slot on the bench. My perception (opinion) is they will be OK with a beefed up G League offering more opportunities for players in exchange - plus something else whatever that may be.

End of the day - I am not going to the mat to argue against someone whose opinion is that the teams are all lined up to change the one and done. Both his and mine are opinions at this point. I just think if you really look at the incentives and realities for teams to change the rule it isn't as simple as the Commish makes it. Though he scores wonderful PR brownie points with his expressed desire to do it.

 

[kg01]

There were reports/articles about NBA teams not really excited about taking away the one year they get to see kids in college and not excited about evaluating in AAU/HS gyms. More of the former but a couple of the latter. At least that I recall and I didn't save them. A lot of the articles about mistakes came out when they went to the one and done but there have been ones since.

I have no illusion that the players association won't want something for the change. Or that the voice of LeBron who was before one and done is different than the "rank and file" guy who is trying to hang on to his #9 slot on the bench. My perception (opinion) is they will be OK with a beefed up G League offering more opportunities for players in exchange - plus something else whatever that may be.

End of the day - I am not going to the mat to argue against someone whose opinion is that the teams are all lined up to change the one and done. Both his and mine are opinions at this point. I just think if you really look at the incentives and realities for teams to change the rule it isn't as simple as the Commish makes it. Though he scores wonderful PR brownie points with his expressed desire to do it.

I hear you.

The rule certainly benefits teams tremendously. However, I don't think it can/should stand up to real scrutiny. It simply makes no sense.

I do agree though that this is a great pat on the back Silver is giving himself.

 

[YlJacket]

Whether it makes sense - like beauty - is in the eye of the beholder.

If you are the GM whose job is on the line for his first round pick - one and done looks pretty damn good.
If you are the owner who has to stroke a check out of his share of the revenues to fund and expanded G League then you may think the current reliance on the NCAA is pretty sweet.
Especially if you have a PR savant out front playing shell games with the press OK that is an overstatement but my best attempt at KG humor.

 

[slugboy]

The key point in Red's post is that the teams are pushing back on Silver's desire to do away with the one and done for exactly the reason they are worried about $5m mistakes.

I completely understand that. But an anecdote or two doesn't mean that it's a reasonable concern on their behalf. NBA teams are already evaluating 7 footers from Pakistan who haven't seen even AAU competition. Should they have a 1 and done rule, or should they be more evidence-based in their evaluations and salary offers?

Whether it makes sense - like beauty - is in the eye of the beholder.

If you are the GM whose job is on the line for his first round pick - one and done looks pretty damn good.
If you are the owner who has to stroke a check out of his share of the revenues to fund and expanded G League then you may think the current reliance on the NCAA is pretty sweet.
Especially if you have a PR savant out front playing shell games with the press OK that is an overstatement but my best attempt at KG humor.

The answer to the GM is "be good at talent evaluation and salary negotiations". Do you want to be the GM who could have gotten the next great player out of high school, but had to wait a year and someone else got them?

Is the G-league really expensive? The owners seem to like it, and they tend not to like money pits. And G-League games aren't free--cheap, but not free.

 

[BeeRBee]

@YlJacket have there been reports of teams against eliminating the rule? Just curious. I hadn't seen anything either way.

And I think the players assoc could indeed be an impediment. Remember, they typically don't care about guys who aren't NBA clients. These prospective HS players, if allowed in, will be cheap(ish) and will be taking higher-paying jobs away from guys who are likely the managing members of the players assoc.

This is an interesting article, including comments from the Executive Director of the PA.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...le-roberts-ncaa-institution-broken/376335002/

I also found this one interesting, because it mentions the series of international academies the NBA is funding.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...-female-baller-blazing-a-new-path-to-the-pros