If you were 18 and were good enough to play in the NBA, how would you like somebody telling you that you can't play and pursue your dream? What other section of society is denied the opportunity of free choice and enterprise? Why is it OK for high school baseball, hockey, golf players to be drafted but it's not OK for the NBA? If you want to go and work at McDonald's at 15, you can do that. You can get recruited to the army at 18 and die because somebody else wants you to fight their war. But you can't do what you want to do and play basketball? What right does anybody have to deny somebody else's career choice and dream? We live in a world that is defined by competitiveness. The free market is flooded with new companies that want to make it big. There is no law that tells new companies that they can't compete with established companies because of seniority. If a NBA player is good enough, allow him to compete at the highest level. If a veteran is bumped, so be it.
lol, everytime someone makes an anti-agelimit arguement they use that drivel about being 18 and getting being in the military. that has absolutely nothing to do with the nba. for every lebron (nevermind that he's the only person other than amare to put up decent numbers out of high school) that comes into the league, there's 800 kwame browns. I didn't say I care about veterans or anything of that sort. what is this babble about denying a dream? the age limit they were suggesting is 20, not 45. you're grasping at straws man. I simply would like to see more polished players coming into the league again, it's a known fact that the more polished players are ones out of college. you can't even argue that.
There are more busts coming out of college than high school.Look at last year's draft and let me know how many highschoolers failed. What's up with for every Lebron there's 800 failing? First you can't say for "every Lebron", because he's Jordan material. How many Jordans come out of college? 800 failing? name more than 3 high schoolers in each of the last 7 years draft that failed. The succeed/fail ratio is way better for high school than college. Has any of the Rockets busts during the last 6 years been out of high school? No, they've all been college stiffs. All the arguments are besides the point, though. Bottomline is: You can't tell somebody what to do, just like I can't tell you what to do. The constitution grants people the freedom to choose.
No you cant tell someone what to do, its unconstitutional. But as an industry you can set reasonable barriers of entry. Case in point. There are many children blessed with mathamatical genius at an early age. Yet you dont see them applying for highpost jobs at Nasa or The Pentagon even though intellectualy they are capable of handling the math required. Why? Because they lack the maturity and experience. You might argue that intelectual vs physical genius are two different items with a different set of criteria but it doesnt change the fact that an industry can set minimum requistes with regards to experience. Just because a highschooloer understands and has a predatory instinct for international finances you think he's gonna get a job at Goldman Sachs? By setting an age limit what the NBA is doing is no different from what other industries do.
The NBA does not have a legitimate barrier of entry. David Stern has not come up with a legitimate reason on how this age barrier helps the NBA product. All he has said is: "We think it's better for the kids to gain some college experience" Translation: "The old white folks who are the majority of the viewership and attendance are turned off by these young hip-hop culture players". That is the only big issue preventing the consumation of the next CBA. The players union will not back down (as well they shouldn't) unless they receive compensation in another area (say length of contracts or something)
Brand is a stud on a horrible franchise. Corey Maggette has consistenly improved in the league. Williams and Hurley are injury tragedies- hard to call them busts when their careers were taken prematurely. As a 3rd overall pick, Laettner was a bust, but a 12 year and counting career. Look at baller's list of Arizona players- All good players. Who among them would you take over Brand or Maggette? MAYBE Bibby or Arenas. Point is, there is no point of relevance here. No one's asking Chris Duhon to be Jason Kidd. If your argument is going to Duke prevents Duhon from being a francise PG, congratulations. There's no school that's a factory for franchise players. Jordan came from UNC. Hakeem from UH. Barkley from Auburn. Shaq from LSU. Kobe, KG, LeBron and TMac made the jump. As far as the actual topic. I like Duhon, but wouldn't give him the full MLE. I think signing him will be too difficult as his restricted status would require severely overpaying like giving him a max MLE deal.
The players union represents the players. Every high schooler that comes in the league is one other player, perhaps a current player, that can no longer be in the league. Or perhaps another player eating their playing time preventing them getting a pay day. There's certainly some incentives for the players to have a minimum age.
The players union doesn't want an age limit though. So if there are incentives to protect veterans, the incentives to draft high school players outweigh them.
but see the thing is it costs owners alot of money to scout out hs players as young as 16 due to the new trend. it makes sense to me that owners would want the age limit due to finances, not race. if an age limit existed it would be easier to scout players and see how they handle fame and life outside of home in college. owners could also see how well they lead a team and how they handle the pressures of march madness and how they handle failure. its not totally out of the realm of crazy to suggest that owners would want to see some semblance of character on and off the court outside of moving from hs. if darius miles and deshawn stevenson went to college would they have been mature enough to stay out of trouble? hard to say but it something to think about... it takes alot of money and time to scout and develop these players. if im gonna throw millions out on a 18 year old its not comforting to know that his mom still does his laundry
Translation: "The old white folks" who own the teams don't want to pay teen-agers millions to sit on their bench while they develop when they could watch them develope for free in college. They can't trust themselves to just not draft them because the next team might. If they make sure no one can draft them then they can sit back and scout them for 2 more years. It would also be good for the colleges, at least for the Dukes, UNC's, Arizona's, UConn's, et al because parity has struck college basketball with the best players getting syphoned off to the NBA.
agreed.. These "kids" need to go to college and grow up, I'm not saying Kobe Bryant would not have raped someone if he went, he would have far less pepernsity to do it tho. Look, if I am 18 and a team is asking me to take them from no. 28th in the league to championship ready I am gonna feel a lot of pressure, one because I have to prove myself, and two because I have to make my team a really good team out of nothing. Look, if I came from college, at least one of those two things is clear, not only that, I am older, so i don't have to take so much flack from all of the haters. Kobe raped that girl because of the pressure he faced after choking in the playoffs for the first time. He didn't not know how to lose because all he played was winning ball. It takes a good basketball player to be able to take winning and losing, and these are only learned by maturity. So yes, college does decrease raping. GO DUKE!
It's called making a business decision. Risk versus reward How is the decision of drafting a teen different from the decision to give a 32 year old a 6 year contract (Nash situation)? You don't know if that player is going to perform when he approaches 40 years old. You CANNOT deny somebody the chance to play in the NBA. It's unconstitutional. The constitution affords everybody FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Oh my, college decreases rapes now. Why didn't Kobe rape anyone after all those air balls against Utah? Man, I thought I've heard it all. BTW, I must of missed Kobe's trial, because I didn't know he was proven to be a rapist. Also, since when does a team expect a rookie to make them championship caliber? Like macfan said, there's no legitimate reason on how this age barrier helps the NBA product. The rule the NBA (NCAA) is trying to push not only keeps a player from doing something they want to do, it forces them to do something they don't want or need to do. Isn't that unconstitutional or something?
uuhhhh yes you can, because being able to play in the nba isnt a constitutional right. the nba is a product, the government has no direct regulation on it. david stern and the union can pass a rule allowing only players to play with afros if they would think it would make them more money. the nba is a privately owned business that puts out a product, if stern wanted to make the age limit 40 then he could. people just wouldnt watch his product. what maurice clarett did was try to find a loophole that by proposing an age limit you would be denying him of life, liberty, and property (esentially his right to make a living). but that didnt fly, which is why he had to wait a year. you dont have to paly in the nfl/nba. you arent born with those rights. if you dont like the sanctions on the product then you can go make a living elsewhere, why the nfl/nba?
David Stern can't do anything unless the players association agrees to it, and if they do it wouldn't make it unconstitutional anyway, it would make it legal.
right, stern and the union have the ability to legislate anything they see fit -- its not unconstitutional at all. if he proposes an age limit and they pass it, it makes it legal in the nba (not legal in the way of law). these guys arent amending constitutional doctrines or anything when they put rules in ...
This is the communist theory in a nutshell. Stern can do whatever he wants, but his restriction has to have an ethical and fair reason behind it. SO far, he hasn't provided a legitimate reason for imposing a limit. As such, it is unconstitutional (you can't discriminate based on age, sex, race, religion etc). That's why the NFL went to Court. Clarett challenged the constitutionalism of the age barrier and he lost. The judge decided that it is constitutional for the NFL to impose such a limit because the NFL product is better without teens as well as the physicality of the NFL which the judge determined is too much for teens. So the judge determined that the NFL wasn't discriminating. STERN will have to go to court as well if the union and him don't compromise. However, the NBA and Stern are not likely to win, because differently from the NFL, the NBA has had players who have proved to be successful out of high school (7 all-stars in this year's all star game). IF YOU DON'T LIKE DRAFTING HIGH SCHOOLERS, DON'T DRAFT THEM. IT'S A LEVELED PLAYING FIELD
dude ... you just really dont understand the situation. youre right, stern just cant pose an age limit because he needs union consent -- this is why an age limit probably wont happen. if stern and the union deem it necessary to put an age limit, THEN THEY CAN DO THAT. the question is will it help the product? the players association says no, which is why it probably wont happen. **this is not unconstitutional** its not written in the constitution that its your unalienable right to play in the nba. stern's reasoning is the exact reasoning that krocket and i posted earlier. do you think we made that up for him? he explicitly stated those reasons, saying that it takes millions to develop players, some which never pan out. stern has to goto court to justify the age limit??? when did that happen? did someone sue him?? i must have missed that notice. but of course im just coming here spouting communist propganda
The owners are little boys with big toys, and they can't trust themselves not draft high schoolers unless there is an enforcible rule against them doing so. That is why THE OWNERS want the rule. The Players Association probably has a similar self-serving reason, like keeping more money for themselves, I don't know. I assure you that neither motive is probably altruistic. That is the cynical point of view, that it has nothing to do with right and wrong, just MONEY !!
