NBPA Will Seek Lower Age Limit
- Thread starter Big Boss
- Start date
-
- Tags
- basketball nba nbpa ncaa
Who suggested otherwise? I'm not sure. You only really had one decade (about 13 years to be exact) where you didn't have some form of an age limit, be it written or unwritten so it wouldn't be a fair comparison either way when you consider the league has been around for 70.
Strawman alert. The argument is not and never has been whether or not guys could eventually be successful minus college, because obviously they can. The argument comes down to immediate dividends and no one has yet to show me immediate dividends for straight from HS players that come close to comparable talents with 2+ years between HS and entering the league.
Not too many jobs are equivalent comparisons to going to the NBA yet cats stay pulling this "right to work/apply" false equivalence out of their asses.
Collusion is illegal and thusly secretive. They flat out said they didn't want younger players and they have the legal right to set whatever standards are collectively bargained. Collusion would be letting guys enter the draft and then just not drafting them which ironically enough numerous cats in here who are anti-age limit have espoused.
That's the dirty little secret that nobody is talking about. Both the age limit and max salaries are here because of rank and file vets looking to preserve their money and roster spots.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
Also, there is no correlation between staying in college for 2+ years and being a successful player, and there has never been any correlation. Or immediate dividends. There is no evidence to show a few years of college matters.
Using the pre-1994 NBA as an example is weak because there werent a lot of HS players and 1-year players entering the draft. The best example is using the last 20 years or so since players were leaving earlier.
Teams clearly have no issue with young talent...and it's not as many players that go pro after 1 year of college as is made out to be..The majority Stay for 2-3 years...However the more dominant talents do go pro early...In face Dame Lillard and Steph Curry are the only anomalies.
Go back and look at the last 15 years of draft pools...you'll see on average the players who came out in 1-2 years fared better as pros than those who stayed for 3-4 years.
Based off that finding it's a personal issue to why they want players to be older nothing to do with basketball production..
Is Doug Mcdermott, Adrienne Payne, out performing Andrew Wiggins?
Still trying to figure out who said this. I have never said or come close to implying this or anything of the sort. There is no real denying the immediate dividends piece. Pre 94 is all we have though. The best of the best don't stay 2 plus years today but they do generally come into their own between 20-22 aka the same ages that previous eras of greats were entering the league.
Thusly why I am focusing on those talents. If teams didn't have an issue with young talent they wouldn't be steadily trying to raise the age limit.
Why aren't players trying to raise the age limit? They'd have the least to lose from raising the age limit.
Guys like Anthony Davis, Kyrie Irving, John Wall went pro after one year..Guys like McDermott stayed what's the difference?
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
No, we have post-1994 where players were leaving at various times. That is the truer statistic.
And its also not true the at the best of hte best were coming into their own at 20-22. If anything, it was 24-26 for the college guys. Why? Because it took a couple of years to get used to playing in the pros and getting their bodies in tune. DWade for example didnt become that nikka until he was 23-24. DRose became that nikka at 21. Lebron was 20.
The true statement is that it took a couple of years for players to really find their stride, regardless the amount of years in college. What matters is the amount of years they were in the NBA.
Why did players go along with the age limit the first time? You realize we wouldnt' have one if they didn't sign off on it right?
The difference is talent. Guys like Mike and Duncan and Kareem put up MVP caliber numbers their first year. None of the straight from HS or one and done players have done so. What's the difference?
It's not a truer statistic because as I stated in the post you quoted the best of the best have pretty much all come out early in recent years. A supremely talented player in this day and age staying for 3 years is an anomaly whereas in years past it was the norm. So comparing the guys who leave early today to guys who stay today leaves us with the false equivalence of comparing Anthony Davis to Doug McDermott. Whereas comparing Davis to his talent peers like Duncan or Shaq or Hakeem seems to be a far better measure IMO.
How many became that nikka at 18 or 19 which is all that's relevant if you are anti-age limit?
Last edited:
Only someone who is a c00n and pro slavery would be against reducing the age limit
Why the fukk should a prospect who otherwise would make millions in the NBA be forced to play for FREE in the ncaa while they make millions of him?
Why the fukk should a prospect who otherwise would make millions in the NBA be forced to play for FREE in the ncaa while they make millions of him?
tremonthustler1
aka bx_representer
Self-preservation
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
right, and Davis is currently younger than Shaq and Duncan were when they started to take over the NBA
