The union favors eliminating the current CBA's ban on players straight from high-school, but says...

The union favors eliminating the current CBA's ban on players straight from high-school, but says that the issue has not yet been a big factor. Hunter explains the union's proposal: "I don't know if there has been much discussion. Our position is that players should be incentivized to stay in school if that's what they want. Let's reduce the duration of the rookie scale. For every year a guy stays in school, a year comes off the rookie scale. So if a kid decides to stay for four years, he'd come in, maybe spend a year in the league, then he'd be an unrestricted free agent." '

This sounds like a really bad idea from the teams perspective. The problem with preps to pros was guys entering the league too early and taking up valuable roster spots. If the above change is enacted then there would be incentive to draft younger players not older more experienced players due to the shorter rookie contract.

A better idea would be to add a multpier to the rookie wage depending on your experience. For example 0 bonus from HS., 10K for 1 yer colloge, 30K for 2 years, 60K for three years and 100K for four years of college added to the currecnt rookie wage. It could work and make kids realize that staying longer in school gets them drafted higher and more pay.

Your thoughts?

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/26647/the-players-associations-thinking

about 1 year ago NWfan 22 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'd like to see it like baseball

Either go straight from high school or stay 3 years. This mostly benefits the college game, though, so I don’t see the NBA adopting it

I love B Edge almost as much as I love B Roy and close to my love for B atum

by kengriffey on Mar 23, 2011 10:50 AM PDT reply actions

this

been saying this for a while. it’s a win-win-win for the league, the players, and college basketball

"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare

by douglast on Mar 23, 2011 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions

All those bans are restraints on trade designed to disadvantage the employee and favor the owner

by oregonslee on Mar 23, 2011 11:12 AM PDT reply actions

You're right

Business owners shouldn’t make any money. It’s selfish.

Rumor has it that Dos Equis first approached Aldridge, but Aldridge turned thrm down because the real 'most interesting man in the world' would not have to prove it in a commercial. - Canis Hoopus 1/7/11

by jamon51 on Mar 23, 2011 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions

Those business owners have trouble turning a profit in a monopoly.

I have no sympathy for them if they are that incompetant.

The cake was a lie.

by xedubx on Mar 23, 2011 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes, they have a monopoly on sports entertainment...

by driver8x on Mar 23, 2011 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions

no duh, and its about time

way WAY over payed players and owners losing millions each year.

by hoodieNation on Mar 23, 2011 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions

I like the idea of increasing their pay

if they stay in school. Win-win.

by jamon51 on Mar 23, 2011 11:18 AM PDT reply actions

is that really incentive enough to stop a kid from leaving college early though?

If I knew I was going to get drafted one year, I don’t care if its 30th, I wouldn’t be staying in school with the potential to get hurt or go undrafted the next year. You can always go back to college.

by hoodieNation on Mar 23, 2011 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions

How about the way baseball does it?

Your options are to go straight to the pros from high school or else wait until you are 21 and/or play 3 years in college. Here is an article saying the NCAA would prefer this:

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/17/ncaa-president-wants-the-nba-to-adopt-baseball-like-draft-rules/

This way there may be 1-3 players a year who can make the jump early, otherwise they must mature 3 years in NCAA or European leagues. Better for colleges to have more contunuity and better for NBA to have more developed players, IMHO.

"What we have here, is a failure to communicate."

by with_a_z on Mar 23, 2011 11:27 AM PDT reply actions

I like the concept...

but I think young players will go for the money over the education…

#20

IIbdII

by clinchmobb on Mar 23, 2011 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions

then set up the D-league like baseball's minor league feeder system

the only problem is who’s going to pay for it? Would there be 30 D-league teams each owned by an NBA owner? Some of these owners are cash-strapped, already

When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!

by two4larue on Mar 23, 2011 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions

A lot of fans believe that owners

own the business and the players. That of course is flawed and immoral.

by oregonslee on Mar 23, 2011 11:35 AM PDT reply actions

let NBA teams draft high schoolers

but no one plays in the NBA till they turn 20.
Guys drafted by the NBA right out of high school would have to play in the
D-League until they turn 20.
Draftees in the D-League make 10% of the rookie NBA rookie wage based on draft position, for example Luke Babbit would make $165,000 this year and Armon Johnson would make $47,000.
NBA teams can keep their draftees in the D-League for a max of 4 years or until they turn 21 whichever comes first, at which point the team either brings them up and pays them at rookie scale based on their draft position the season they are brought up or release them and let them become unrestricted free agents.

Red means run, son, numbers add up to nothin

by Biph on Mar 23, 2011 1:25 PM PDT reply actions

some good ideas in here

"I want to be traded to a contender" is almost always code-speak for "I'm a loser."
-Dave, 2/5/2010: http://www.blazersedge.com/2010/2/5/1297509/no-amore-for-amare

by douglast on Mar 23, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions

I like it

It’s basically a “soft” ban on coming straight out of high school, with the exception for players who REALLY don’t want to go to college.

by zbrum on Mar 23, 2011 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions

I don't view it that way

I think even 47 k a year for an 18 or 19 year old is really good money, I just think if the NBA is gonna have minor league then use it as a minor league.

Red means run, son, numbers add up to nothin

by Biph on Mar 23, 2011 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions

I like it!

How would it work around drafting Europeans or collegians who chose to play oversees? I can imagine the case where a top pick decides to play in Europe over the D-league because maybe the competition is better and they would very likely make more money.

#20

IIbdII

by clinchmobb on Mar 23, 2011 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions

no one plays in the NBA until they are 20.

if the euro is 20 or older he cam play here if not he can play in Europe or the d-league. I figure any Euro drafted is already playing for a pro team in Europe. If U.S. High Schoolers want that option then they can sign with a European team before or instead of entering the NBA draft.

Red means run, son, numbers add up to nothin

by Biph on Mar 23, 2011 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions

why pussyfoot around?

if we’re just trying to motivate kids to play somewhere besides the NBA to hone their skills, pay ‘em to do it. You don’t need some gimicky change to the salary structure to do that.

Also, the idea that NCAA basketball is good for player development is a joke. The limitations on practice time (just as a player should be working hardest on his game) and reduction in games played (a HS senior probably plays 50-60 games between AAU and HS ball) is really, really suboptimal and goes a long way toward explaining why European players come into the league with much more finely honed skills than NCAA players of the same age.

i keep dancing on my own

by atomiccafe on Mar 24, 2011 7:15 AM PDT reply actions