How to reform the NBA post-lockout: "3 year rule"

[Broseph Stalin]

I been frustrated with how the NBA has gotten "watered down" over the decades. Its to the point where many are calling for contraction of perennial loosing teams always loosing money. In the 60's and 70's there were many teams with two or MORE HOL caliber players on their rosters, along with repeating all-stars as well. Although the league has expanded many times since then, I feel the owners and the commissioner should look into a 3 year rule or a college lock rule to help balance the number of teams and quality of players. With the rule in place it would force these future prospects to learn FUNDAMENTALS of basketball, either in college, Europe or other leagues; Not just ride on sheer athletic ability or media hype. The NBA is a professionals league. Teams, fans, and especially coaches want their players to know the game of basketball at a proficient level coming INTO the league. NBA teams would not have to worry as much over picking a draft bust and gamble on hype. Scouts would have a much clearer picture on their prospects. Over the course of three years, draft prospects could and should've polished their skills to a level they may have never gotten to by jumping right into the league. Especially if they would've been riding the bench or seeing limited minutes on a NBA roster. Another idea (and to maybe soften critics) is a college lock rule. This is where a player has the right to choose to enter into the NBA draft at 18, or choose to begin to play at the college level. If the latter is taken the player will not be permitted in the NBA for 3 years. Hopefully with a rule like the above in place, draft classes perhaps could double their all-star potential players and enrich its overall quality that would suit a 30 team league to choose from.

[shadowgrin]

Spencer Haywood.

[Broseph Stalin]

I liked that you brought him up. I wonder if his court ruling barred the NBA from ever revisiting the age requirement again. Hopefully not

[NovU]

Ouch. A heavy topic. I am still against age rule but whatever only if that's a part of the solution for some teams losing money

[Andrew]

Honestly, I don't think a three year rule would guarantee any level of quality for incoming talent in the NBA.

We can easily point to examples like Tim Duncan and Steve Nash, - successful players who spent at least three years in college (a full four in their case) - and contrast them with the likes of Leon Smith, Darius Miles and Kwame Brown who made the jump from high school to the pros, or players like Julian Wright and Javaris Crittenton who only spent a year or two in college. Such comparisons make a good case for lengthier college careers better preparing players for the pros and allowing them a greater chance at success.

However, we could just as easily point to LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett and compare them to the like of Adam Morrison and Joe Alexander, both of whom three years in college (with Morrison being a highly touted prospect) but have fizzled out of the league. Derrick Rose is doing alright after only one year at Memphis and Magic Johnson still stands as the prime example that a one-and-done player can be successful in the NBA.

When it comes down to it, the players that have the talent, the drive and the mindset to succeed in the NBA will make the league and have some measure of success, no matter how or when they get there; one year in college, three years in college, playing in Europe first (as Brandon Jennings did) or coming from another country in the first place. At the same time, the players who ultimately don't have what it takes to succeed at the NBA aren't going to enjoy the same level of success and there's nothing that can be done about that, regardless of how long they played college ball.

Until a player is tested at the NBA level, no one really knows for sure how successful they can be or whether they're truly cut out for the NBA. As such, no matter what system is in place you're not going to prevent failure, or to put it more kindly, little to very modest success (since making the NBA and getting any court time in the first place is a considerable achievement in itself).

That's not to say you can't tweak the system or change things so that spending a little longer in college is a more attractive option and that better support systems are set up so that players get better advice and are better taken care of, but simply putting a restriction in place saying "You must play at least three years in college" won't accomplish anything.

As far as teams losing money, it's a matter of either introducing a cap system that tries to further level the playing field and restrict teams from frivolous overspending or teams need to bring in smarter executives who can better evaluate a player's worth and won't panic and go over budget to sign a mediocre player. If no one is willing to pay mediocre players top dollar, then there's no bidding war to drive up their salaries. Want to get paid like the best? Well, you'll have to be one of them.

[Lamrock]

I think a lot of players would just sign in Europe and never come back.

[benji]

I'm pretty sure the year rule was because NBA teams wanted to see high schoolers against a higher level of competition and also to force them to spend a year away from their natural environment.

Most NBA teams hate what NCAA coaches do to players anyway and have to remake the players. It's not like 30 games against shit teams coached by a used car salesmen really makes you develop. I'd rather the players go to Europe or get into the NBA and have actual organizations that can work with and develop them. Jermaine O'Neal had to have benefited from growing up facing Sheed and co in practice rather than beating up on 6-6 centers and banging co-eds for three years.

and Magic Johnson still stands as the prime example that a one-and-done player can be successful in the NBA.

Might want to check that.

I say this only because Magic is someone I know intimately due to the one time he was in the same Burger King as me and said hello.

[shadowgrin]

[koberulz]

Magic Johnson still stands as the prime example that a one-and-done player can be successful in the NBA.

What.

[The X]

I think you meant two-and-done Andrew

[Andrew]

Quite right. For some reason I recalled him coming out of college after one season, should've double-checked myself on that one.

[Broseph Stalin]

You bring up some great points Andrew. A lot of it does boil down to the mindset of players to actually succeed and commit to great play once getting into the NBA. Perhaps a major rule change will never come to fruition in today's modern game. Yet, I just feel something needs to be "tweaked" to at least help some of the situation at hand. I sure hope things get settled out after this lockout, and benefits the NBA as a whole and put it in the best position it can be in.