Anthony Bennet was 20. Stupid organizations will always be stupid no matter what age limit you make up. Hell, the Cavs had LeBron and could not do it right. Now look at them without a ready made suprstar.
The NBA could easily address this by adjusting the probabilities in the weighted lottery system, or abandoning it outright (randomizing the order of all non-playoff teams), for just a couple of many options. Even then, some teams would still make poor selections. Increasing the age for eligibility can only help to increase the overall level of talent and skill league-wide, even if it only benefits a handful of players each year with the raw talent to make the league, but lack the maturity and basketball knowledge during their window to prove themselves at the pro level.
it's about damn time. Too many immature brats enter the NBA as soon as they can. Even the talented players are a pain. Hopefully this leads to less Royce Whites.
To respond to many of the responses in this thread: It's an age requirement, not an NCAA requirement. For those who feel so victimized by the concept of a free education, top notch coaching that preps you for the pros, and 2-4 years of athlete/stud status on a college campus, feel free to go earn a check in a foreign or independent league. There's a reason very few opt for the Brandon Jennings path instead of going on and done in college. For every Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, and LeBron James, I can show you a Jonathan Bender, Robert Swift, or Sebastian Telfair that could have probably benefited from a couple years under the structure of a college coaching staff to jumpstart their NBA careers. For every Tracy McGrady, Rashard Lewis, and Dwight Howard, I can show you a Korleone Young, Ndudi Ebi, or Ousmane Cisse who went straight from American high schools to the NBA draft, but never stuck on a team, and not because they lacked raw physical gifts.
It would improve the quality of Basketball but GM's should get the decide between a younger kid or someone with a few years like we did getting Parsons.
Are people really saying kids need to be more mature to play basketball for pay when they can go fight wars on our behalf (and possibly die) at the same age, or vote? Please make me understand how it takes more maturity to play basketball than go to Iraq. And for those saying the high school kids bust too often, please provide some support to show their bust rate is higher than guys who go to college.
In Bender's case, he suffered injuries that killed his career. He might have been much worse off going to college. Greg Oden as well. These guys might have lost millions by having to stay in college just to have their bodies break down. All those guys from HS that failed in the NBA are hardly guaranteed to have improved by going to college.
How would it benefit the NBA? Most of the great players in the league are the ones who came out of HS or left after 1 season. There are just as many busts that stay in college multiple seasons. I agree that it would benefit college basketball if some of the best talent is forced to play there as opposed to the league where they can get paid for it.
Instead of raising the age limit, they should look to administer requisite classes on financial responsibility. If they can put the ball in the hoop at 18, then let them.
You raise good questions. I would say that you present a bit of a false analogy, though. The government isn't mandating an age requirement for the NBA, the privately held NBA is. So first, it's important to establish that the league fully reserves the right to enact such a policy. I feel like there is a tone in this thread that would suggest they are out of bounds legally in some respect. If you're arguing on an ethical basis, then my counter would be that, unfortunately, many 18-20 year olds enlist in the armed services as a result of their immaturity. I can only speak anecdotally on this, but I have several friends and family members who would attest to this. (Not suggesting that this is true across the board; there are many others who are well aware of the complexities and struggles they are signing up for.) Secondly, anyone who wants to play pro ball at age 18 can. Foreign leagues are becoming more competitive and paying higher salaries every year. Certainly not a bad way to earn a living. From a basketball perspective, we do have evidence that it takes time to learn how to play team ball, particularly team defense, which is what often limits playing time for first and second year players. If a team has a maximum of four years of control of a first round pick on a rookie scale contract, but the first couple of years they're still learning how to play team defense at the pro level, the value they receive is diminished compared to a 20 year old that is "NBA ready" for all four years. The increase from 19 to 20 is just one shade of grey.
It's debatable as to whether one would benefit more from one to two years of rookie scale salary or a college education. Depends a lot on where they would be picked. I could argue both sides. I agree that going to college or playing in a foreign or independent league before coming to the NBA is no guarantee that they will improve. I would guess that it rarely would hurt.
They are not out of bounds legally. It's just a crock to say that a 18 year old is not old enough to play a sport in your league, yet they are old enough to die for the country at the same age, or old enough to play the exact same sport in another league (NCAA). I'm aware that the NBA can set whatever guideline they like. But that doesn't mean it isn't a BS one. If the NBA wants to use the NCAA as their farm system they are well within their right to do so. I know plenty of 18-20 years olds that enlist because it is a good option for them (ie pays for school). Very mature thinking. Either way, they are still considered old enough to make that decision. It's a crock that a kid the same age can't be considered mature enough to play a sport. What sense does it make to have to leave your country to play pro ball at 18 when you can vote and die for the country at the exact same age? Do we have evidence that guys who stay in school longer are more prepared to play team ball then guys who don't? Taking the time to learn these things has to happen for rookies no matter what stage they were when they came out. Derrick Rose, for example, adapted to this league quicker than Chandler Parsons did. Where is the evidence that guys who stay longer are more ready when they enter the league? Why are the majority of the leagues top players the ones who came out early? Where is the evidence that the bust rate is lower among those who stayed in college longer?
I see where you're coming from. I maintain that the military argument is a false analogy on two fronts. One is an age limit mandated by government, another is mandated by a privately held business (which you concede, but still feel is a crock). It's debatable that the age limit for military service is correct and ethical. I personally have mixed feelings, you may not. I've seen it serve some people well, and I've also seen naive 18 year olds get duped by recruiting officers with sad results. It's a debate for a separate forum, but either way, it's unfair to suggest that that the military rule is an applicable analogy. As for leaving the country, you don't have to. There's the ABA, CBL, IBL, PBL, PBC, and NBA-DL, among a whole slew of regional semi-pro leagues. And even if you want to leave the country for a couple of years, I don't really have a lot of sympathy. A friend of mine played pro ball in Europe after college for a couple of years and he claims it was the best time of his life. I don't have numbers on the bust rate, but I would be curious to see them. Sounds like we're both speculating. In all honesty, I'm really just relying on my gut from following the league over the past 20ish years (with a few changes to the draft and rookie scale contracts). I could be wrong.
http://hoopsanalyst.com/blog/?p=285 http://chasing23.com/david-stern-is-wrong-again-why-high-school-players-belong-in-the-nba-draft/ http://teacher.scholastic.com/scholasticnews/indepth/upfront/debate/index.asp?article=d031510 Icehouse, I'm glad you brought that point up, because there's very little data or actual statistics presented when discussing raising the NBA age limit. Everyone always says, "Oh for every Kobe or KG, there are five Kwame Browns." "High school players going straight to NBA are more prone to immaturity, bankruptcy, or being out of the league in 3 years." In reality, the links of above, more or less show that high school drafted NBA players and international players tended to be more successful in the NBA, along with the one-and-dones. Oddly, right. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/05.27/01-mccann.html http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/05.27/01-mccann.html
Damn Silver should raise it to 21 that way you have to go to college for three to four years and cut out all the knuckleheadedness that rampant in the league now. There would be smarter players spending their money better and not afraid of the end of their careers because they'd have a degree. And it would make for better college basketball, some of these players like the kid from Kansas that everyone says was the next Lebron, looks like the next Labarron. He could benefit from staying in school and learning the game of basketball. Cream rises to the top, if you are consistent for 3-4 years in college then you're ready for the big bucks and bright lights. No more Anthony Bennetts!!!
False Analogy, I completely disagree ... If you said weak analogy or somewhat inconsequential. I would understand it, if the age-limit rules were based on strong statistical correaltion betwen the bust rate of high school players in comparison to other classes of NBA players. Many issues arise with raising the age limit in the NBA. Inconsequential scenarios between military youth and NBA youth: You are correct ... being drafted for the military and playing the NBA are not consistent, because of the requirement is set by different employers. Still, must point out, that both institutions uses the same age group of men for a specialized labor, so to a point they are consequential. On the other hand, the military trains all of its personnel, oftentimes at a beginners level of skill sets. That's not the case with players drafted out of high school, especially those drafted in the top 25. In such case, a team who drafts such a player may have selected one of the better basketball talents on the planet, especially for youth under 21. Meritocracy Already having an artificial age limit for such career path deteriorates the meritocracy of the NBA. People often cite the military reasons, not because age similiarities, but because of the responsiblities entrusted in the individuals to perform a job, competently or admirably. Although, disimilar, many naturally will ask what responsiblities does a basketball player have that exceeds that of a military personnel or law enforcement officer? On the same token, one does not need to be a certain age to become a doctor, an astronaut, lawyer, or competiting in Olympic-level competition (such as gymnastics; track & field; figure skating; soccer; and ice hockey). If skilled enough in such field, one does not need to be a particular age to compete for profit or under a salaried contract for substantial financial incentives. College vs. Actual Employment: If I'm a talented high-school or college basketball player who is projected to be a top 10 pick, for the sake of the argument I'll even say top 50. Most likely, if I do not endure any off-the-court issues or attain a devestating injury, I'm very likely to receive a career opportunity that will exponentially increase my livelihood. More or less, I have an employment opportunity waiting for me after I finish playing high school or NCAA basketball, regardless if I graduate college or not. How many other fields of study can I make that same declaration, even a bachelors or masters degree in hand? How many sane individuals would turn that such opportunity? Also, if I am not mistaken, I always thought college was open to all ages, regardless if you are 18 or 145 years old, the opportunity to go to college will always be an option. Sadly, going to be NBA isn't, because your physical peak is typically around 25-30, that's only if you last long enough in a league of extraordinary gentlemen. The faces have changed, championships have shifted from city to city, but the rates of draftees flaming out of the league in 2-3 years have remained consistent, regardless of age rules. Rule changes rooted socio-cultural issues: http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/05.27/01-mccann.html This article briefly mentioned it, but shied away from it. When it comes to age restrictions and rules maintaining players go to college for so many year... are typically reserved for the NBA. Why is that? In other countries, most people do not seem to mind youth athletes playing professional sports for profit ... because they are "good enough." We as Americans do not seem to mind in other sports, as long as it's not football, even then I don't really think it would be such hoopla, since such a player would likely be very skilled or a type of physical specimen who is able to compete and match strength and abilities. Especially someone, like this kid: https://www.google.com/#q=robert+nkemdiche From what I've heard, seen, read about, and witness on television, radio shows, magazines, and research studies that say the NBA is only 3rd and sometimes as low as 6th most popular league, but yet people still have very strong opinions about basketball or matters that effect the NBA, such as the quality of defense; the flopping; or coddling the superstars. Why would anyone even care about age limits in such a league? False Analogy, I completely disagree ... If you said weak analogy or somewhat inconsequential. I would understand it, if the age-limit rules were based on strong statistical correaltion betwen the bust rate of high school players in comparison to other classes of NBA players. Many issues arise with raising the age limit in the NBA. Inconsequential scenarios between military youth and NBA youth: You are correct ... being drafted for the military and playing the NBA are not consistent, because of the requirement is set by different employers. Still, must point out, that both institutions uses the same age group of men for a specialized labor, so to a point they are consequential. On the other hand, the military trains all of its personnel, oftentimes at a beginners level of skill sets. That's not the case with players drafted out of high school, especially those drafted in the top 25. In such case, a team who drafts such a player may have selected one of the better basketball talents on the planet, especially for youth under 21. Meritocracy Already having an artificial age limit for such career path deteriorates the meritocracy of the NBA. People often cite the military reasons, not because age similiarities, but because of the responsiblities entrusted in the individuals to perform a job, competently or admirably. Although, disimilar, many naturally will ask what responsiblities does a basketball player have that exceeds that of a military personnel or law enforcement officer? On the same token, one does not need to be a certain age to become a doctor, an astronaut, lawyer, or competiting in Olympic-level competition (such as gymnastics; track & field; figure skating; soccer; and ice hockey). If skilled enough in such field, one does not need to be a particular age to compete for profit or under a salaried contract for substantial financial incentives. College vs. Actual Employment: If I'm a talented high-school or college basketball player who is projected to be a top 10 pick, for the sake of the argument I'll even say top 50. Most likely, if I do not endure any off-the-court issues or attain a devestating injury, I'm very likely to receive a career opportunity that will exponentially increase my livelihood. More or less, I have an employment opportunity waiting for me after I finish playing high school or NCAA basketball, regardless if I graduate college or not. How many other fields of study can I make that same declaration, even a bachelors or masters degree in hand? How many sane individuals would turn that such opportunity? Also, if I am not mistaken, I always thought college was open to all ages, regardless if you are 18 or 145 years old, the opportunity to go to college will always be an option. Sadly, going to be NBA isn't, because your physical peak is typically around 25-30, that's only if you last long enough in a league of extraordinary gentlemen. The faces have changed, championships have shifted from city to city, but the rates of draftees flaming out of the league in 2-3 years have remained consistent, regardless of age rules. Rule changes rooted socio-cultural issues: http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/05.27/01-mccann.html This article briefly mentioned it, but shied away from it. When it comes to age restrictions and rules maintaining players go to college for so many year... are typically reserved for the NBA. Why is that? In other countries, most people do not seem to mind youth athletes playing professional sports for profit ... because they are "good enough." We as Americans do not seem to mind in other sports, as long as it's not football, even then I don't really think it would be such hoopla, since such a player would likely be very skilled or a type of physical specimen who is able to compete and match strength and abilities. Especially someone, like this kid: https://www.google.com/#q=robert+nkemdiche From what I've heard, seen, read about, and witness on television, radio shows, magazines, and research studies that say the NBA is only 3rd and sometimes as low as 6th most popular league, but yet people still have very strong opinions about basketball or matters that effect the NBA, such as the quality of defense; the flopping; or coddling the superstars. Why would anyone even care about age limits in such a league?
