kids coming out too early: why the draft sucks

[1tinsoldier]

clearly, Lonzo and Josh Jackson are perfect examples of why the nba is f'**ked by players coming out of college too soon

i've never seen rookies look so much like rookies

a point guard who can only make less than a third of his shots and half of his free throws?
Josh drives into traffic without any understanding or respect for his opponent's defense.
their shooting form is horrific.

if both had at least 3 years in college their coaches would have had the time to correct their glaring flaws.
but if that coach only has a year with a player their focus is winning now with whatever skills the player is effective with.
once they're in the nba the stakes are high, fans pay big bucks to watch and the competition for a position is brutal.
there may never be enough time and patience to reprogram their game, especially once they loose the confidence they had as a high school or (brief) college star

i don't know if you can fix Lonzo, Josh, and perhaps Fox in just a couple of years.
but screw them. Josh is our problem.
i believe it starts by admitting his shot MUST be fixed.
and committing to it now with a shooting coach forcing him to change his stroke.
have him come off the bench, play D, and drive until he's confident without that frigging hitch in his shot

[BookTheGoat]

I personally don’t think there should be any rules regarding staying in college. If a team wants to take a chance on a prospect then I think the guy should have that opportunity. The NCAA is corrupt and needs an overhaul more than the NBA or its draft does.

I’d like to see the G league improve enough to be the feeder system into the league.

Also this years rookie class seems pretty strong to me.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[carey]

I agree with you both but I also don't think there should be a draft or a cap on max contracts so my views are extreme.

I didn't want J.J. (I wanted Tatum or Fox.) I think it will cost McDonough his job. Bender, Chriss & now J.J. Not a reliable scorer in the bunch.

[Superbone]

There are some players that can compete straight out of high school and others that take a few years. I lean toward BTG's side.

[1tinsoldier]

i get the freedom lovers approach
but there are many upsides for both the players, teams, and fans to a structured approach
1. players get the experience they need to develop and prosper in the nba
2. teams get better prospects they can better evaluate and prosper with
3. fans get a better product to watch and enjoy and their money is better spent

what is the downside to an age or college level limit?
the players who are ready out of HS will still get their proper due and a better salary when the time comes.
the only downside i can think of is that a player risks injury before their payday
but that's outweighed by players who fail in the nba, who could have been solid players with a long career with the proper training and experience

[1tinsoldier]

the suns are experiencing the results of this drafting freedom

in just a few weeks with our very young team
we are hitting new game lows in defense/margin of defeat
lack of assists
turnovers

we can blame our management for not being as good as others
but we'd be remiss to ignore that today's management needs to both understand the game
and be a little psychic to succeed

[1tinsoldier]

Also this years rookie class seems pretty strong to me.

i don't disagree that the class is strong
but probably more than usual, the order is wrong because we had too little to judge by

if the draft were today, we'd have a very different top ten
and that's with only a few weeks of additional exposure for these players
imagine how much more accurate the draft would be with a year or 2 more exposure for these players

don't forget, the draft is intended to help the most needy teams most
as is, it's like a lottery within a lottery

[BookTheGoat]

Also this years rookie class seems pretty strong to me.

i don't disagree that the class is strong
but probably more than usual, the order is wrong because we had too little to judge by

if the draft were today, we'd have a very different top ten

Kuzma would be in the top 10. Everybody missed on him and he was in school for what 3 or 4 years? It’s not that simple. There’s always been busts. Look at the NFL. All those guys are in school for years and teams still mess up the draft. And they don’t even have the lottery.

I think teams should be rewarded for being able to properly evaluate talent. Look at the 76ers. They hit homeruns with Simmons and Embiid. The thunder drafted KD/Westbrook/Harden back to back to back. The Warriors drafted Curry/Klay/Dray.

It’s always been a crapshoot and I don’t think making players stay longer is really going to change it that much.

There’s also the argument that players benefit more from being in the NBA system rather than the NCAA. It’s frequently used in reference to Simmons/Embiid/Griffin.

I see where you’re coming from though!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Split T]

I actually don't think the top 10 would be all that different. Kuzma and Collins would move up in the draft, but I think most people stick with their guy.

1. Philly probably doesn't trade up and Boston takes Tatum 1
2. Lakers probably still take ball, possibly smith, fox, or Fultz
3. Philly takes Fultz or Smith
4. We probably take one of the pg's or Jackson.
5. Kings stick with Fox if he's there.
6. Magic still take Isaac
7. Bulls take Markkanen
8. Knicks are pretty pleased with Ntilikina
9. Dallas would take Smith if he's there. He's probably the guy most likely to have gone higher.
10. Portland is the only team that obviously switches their pick. Kuzma or Collins go here.

[Split T]

Also, we'll see the age limit disappear before it goes up to 20. I'm in favor of getting rid of the age limit. There's usually a player or two that don't need college who are just hurt by college. I'd love the g league to be a feeder system like minor league baseball.

What if instead of an age limit, you just say that players rookie contracts don't actually start until they are in the NBA. So if you keep a guy in the g league all year then bring him to the NBA in year 2, you maintain all 4/5 years of his rookie scale deal. I'd make a rule that you can only postpone the NBA deal for two years and if the player played at least 2 years in college, then you can only postpone 1 year.

Maybe you still pay them at an NBA minimum level wage instead of g league wage. I think that would somewhat incentivize staying in college till you were ready or at least provide another option to develop before starting your NBA career. Jackson could use a year in the g league.

[1tinsoldier]

well, there are some interesting points to be made
and i haven't studied the issue
but i'd still guess that there's more upside to delayed nba entry.
from what i've heard from the nba commissioner recently
it seems he agrees
and he should up on all the angles

i only started contemplating it based on the poor fundamentals of some of these top picks this year

btw T, i hated Marion's form too but he did carve out a nice career for himself despite me cringing every time he took a 3 (which was too often for my liking)

[Superbone]

My understanding was that the commissioner was leaning the other way. Also, you've got to look at the issue from the player's perspective too while it seems like you're mostly looking at it from the other side tin, correct me if I'm wrong.

[ShelC]

I've always been on the fence about the age limit. I don't think an 18 year old should be restricted from working. That's their decision. But I do think the league has its argument that it needs to do what's best for its business and if GMs are drafting 18 year olds who can't play, it hurts the league. But then I go back and tell myself, "well, its the GM's fault for drafting the 18 year old who can't play". And GMs miss regardless. We got our guy in Devin Booker, didn't get our guy in Archie Goodwin.

Making a kid go to college for 1 year before being eligible for the draft is stupid. They're not getting an education, they're not maturing physically or emotionally enough in a year for it to really make a difference. They'd need to be there at least 2 years, maybe 3, to really see a difference in those areas. I do think there's been a lot done to help smooth the process between college and the pros and there have been a lot of learnings (on both sides, league and players) from previous generations where HS players have gone straight to the pros and failed. But there are always going to be kids who can make the leap and those who can't. Do you penalize the ones who can make the leap by making them go to college because others can't? Are you responsible for the failure of the ones who can't make the leap? Look at Michael Porter this year...if he doesn't recover from that back injury, his career could be over before it starts.

I also think being in college longer helps weed out those who don't improve, aren't mature enough or aren't passionate enough for the NBA. It's easy to hype up and talk about an 18 year old's potential, draft him, and then realize he's can't make it in the league 2 years later. There are tons of examples of this in recent years. But then you look at 3 and 4 year guys who are coached up every day, play in big games, are physically and emotionally more mature and they can be more impactful, even if they're not "superstars".

I think an idea should be mandatory 2 years in college or 2 years in the Gleague. That way you get rid of 1 and dones, it helps the college game a bit more or, the 18 year olds have the option of going pro, can do the GLeague grind, get some kind of real world experience making $40-50K a year (or whatever the salary is), develop their game within a pro setting connected to an NBA team, and it'll help draw more fans to GLeague games and act as a real farm system.

[Superbone]

That's an excellent take, Shelly. I could get behind that last paragraph. It would definitely improve the NBA and it would allow two different path choices for players. A win/win for both sides. I guess you couldn't draft the GLeague guys until they finished their two years and the draft would then become a conglomeration of both college and GLeague guys. Either that or you have two separate drafts.

[ShelC]

Yea there are nuances there that I didn't have time to think through just yet. Something like...if you're 18, you're eligible for the GLeague draft only (not sure what the rules are now) and will get signed to a guaranteed 2 year deal if drafted. There are a lot of different things that would need to get talked about and negotiated...such as how soon could the NBA team call up the 18 yr old. Maybe it's a mandatory 1 year in the Gleague, play on the SL team the following summer, then it can work as a 2 way contract the rest of the way where the player can go to training camp in the 2nd year and stick with the team and work on one of those 2 way contracts? Or maybe it's a mandatory 2 year deal in the Gleague and after tha you can negotiate some kind of rookie scale deal with your team? You just can't have a 20 year who did 2 years in the GLeague and then become regular FAs eligible for a 70mil deal. But then what's the rookie scale for GLeaguers like that? I can't see it working where they get mixed into the normal draft that summer with the rest of the college players. What if the team and player want to work out a long term deal? Maybe there's a Gleague "max" that's in line with the normal rookie scale contracts and extensions have to be done by May 15th or something. That way if the deal can't be worked out, the GLeaguer enters the larger draft pool and can work out individually with teams ahead of the draft?

[Split T]

I still think there should be an option for people who are ready to skip the g league. Could you imagine someone like Jayson Tatum stuck in the g league this year dropping 30/12 and shooting 60% from the field? I still think the best option is turning the g league into a minor league. That's not a simple fix though. Teams don't want to pay 3-4 million dollars to leave a guy in the g league and lose a year of his rookie contract.

[1tinsoldier]

you've got to look at the issue from the player's perspective too while it seems like you're mostly looking at it from the other side tin, correct me if I'm wrong.

i absolutely believe more structure is better for the players overall, though there are always some who'd benefit from an anything goes draft. I believe a win/win/win scenario is achievable for players, owners, and fans. It just takes careful consideration of all factors.