Develop a Real D-League Option

[sufandu]

I read it and I think you make a great point regarding how much room there may or may not be at the D-League level. If every team had one D-League affiliate then there would likely not be room for Rick Jackson out of high school. I also think you are making an argument based on a perfect version of hypothetical.

Sure, like I said it's not perfect, but nothing is. FWIW the d-league wouldn't only be made up of the straight from high school guys. The parent teams could put anyone down there that they wanted to similar to MLB, so that would decrease room too. The hope would be that the NBA would have to really do their homework and figure out exactly who they want to burn three years on straight out of high school. That would hopefully lessen how many guys they pulled the trigger on merely hoping they would work out.

 

[CraigForth]

Sure, like I said it's not perfect, but nothing is. FWIW the d-league wouldn't only be made up of the straight from high school guys. The parent teams could put anyone down there that they wanted to similar to MLB, so that would decrease room too. The hope would be that the NBA would have to really do their homework and figure out exactly who they want to burn three years on straight out of high school. That would hopefully lessen how many guys they pulled the trigger on merely hoping they would work out.

All I am saying here is that having a legitimate D-League could easily have a negative impact on college basketball. Most negative consequences are unintended. Currently, the d-league is not legit, if the NBA started to invest in it, who knows where it ends up. Perhaps they'd decide to have multiple league's designed to separate talent level. Doing that could help in regards to the cost of travel by regionalizing each league.

I'm just saying that as a fan of college basketball, I believe having a pathetic D-League is advantageous. Sounds like most people are more worried about keeping players on their favorite team and if that is what you're after, I'm not sure wishing the NBADL were more legitimate is best way for that to happen.

 

[SBU72]

Yesterday on Rochester radio, Will Carroll advocated the NBA D-league. If you think about it, the D-league would require approximately 320 players (1 team per NBA team x 10 man roster) Even once stocked, how long will the NBA pay guys to develop, meaning how many D-league roster spots open up a year. 50? 100? So what does this do to the college game with the top 50 to 100 players going directly to the pros each year? Ok, some of them might be 3 year players but I say the total will be closer to 100 than 50 as the NBA won't wait more than 3 or 4 years for guys to develop in the league. Carroll acknowledged that college basketball might go the way of college baseball. He says he loves college baseball. He watches the NCAA baseball tourney as much as he can. No regular season. I can envision the same for b-ball. Also, no more 325+ teams in Division 1. P5 teams at the most with the bottom ones not very good.

Also, consider that MLB minor league players do not earn very much money. guys not on the 40 man roster earn from $2150 to $2700 a month. Roster guys get paid $40,750 to $81,750 (/yr) current D-league players are not much better.

 

[sufandu]

All I am saying here is that having a legitimate D-League could easily have a negative impact on college basketball. Most negative consequences are unintended. Currently, the d-league is not legit, if the NBA started to invest in it, who knows where it ends up. Perhaps they'd decide to have multiple league's designed to separate talent level. Doing that could help in regards to the cost of travel by regionalizing each league.

I'm just saying that as a fan of college basketball, I believe having a pathetic D-League is advantageous. Sounds like most people are more worried about keeping players on their favorite team and if that is what you're after, I'm not sure wishing the NBADL were more legitimate is best way for that to happen.

You're right, it's impossible to tell exactly what that type of system would do to college basketball. The best thing the NBA could do for college would be to a adopt the NFL rule of three years out of high school. That's near impossible because they're having a hard enough time trying to get the PA to agree to a two year rule. And a much stronger argument can be made that young basketball players are ready for the pro game earlier than football players, at least the elite guys are. What I suggested would, in theory, strike a compromise for all parties. College basketball would miss out on the most elite players, but there would at least be some sort of stability.

Keep in mind the only party that has a responsibility to the college game is the college game. Neither the NBA nor the players that have no interest in going to college are required to make decisions merely to benefit college basketball, even if their decisions have an unintended impact on it.

 

[CraigForth]

You're right, it's impossible to tell exactly what that type of system would do to college basketball. The best thing the NBA could do for college would be to a adopt the NFL rule of three years out of high school. That's near impossible because they're having a hard enough time trying to get the PA to agree to a two year rule. And a much stronger argument can be made that young basketball players are ready for the pro game earlier than football players, at least the elite guys are. What I suggested would, in theory, strike a compromise for all parties. College basketball would miss out on the most elite players, but there would at least be some sort of stability. Keep in mind the only party that has a responsibility to the college game is the college game. Neither the NBA nor the players that have no interest in going to college are required to make decisions merely to benefit college basketball, even if their decisions have an unintended impact on it.

Stability for college ball seems to be the common thread in arguments. What am I not seeing that everyone else is? Where is the lack of stability? Because guys leave earlier than expected, sometimes? I realize that this response could be seen as snarky as it's hard to interpret text sometime but please know I'm honestly trying to see what apparently everyone except me sees.

 

[MadNY3]

Prediction:

- in the next month, Nike will win the NBA uniform rights and Under Armour will win D League and Combine rights.

- D League will be rebranded and much more will be made of the playoffs taking place now. Fun fact; D League playoffs being viewed on ESPN for first time since 2003.

- in five years, the NBA will have a narrative surrounding the D League final four (taking place just past March Madness) and individual call up stories will rival Olympic athlete story lines.

Check out the d leagues web presence. It is actually better than the NBA's (all due to D League hiring Work & Co, the best digital agency in U.S.) But at long last, the NBA will factor in more than just individual story lines to grow the game.

 

[CraigForth]

Prediction: - in the next month, Nike will win the NBA uniform rights and Under Armour will win D League and Combine rights. - D League will be rebranded and much more will be made of the playoffs taking place now. Fun fact; D League playoffs being viewed on ESPN for first time since 2003. - in five years, the NBA will have a narrative surrounding the D League final four (taking place just past March Madness) and individual call up stories will rival Olympic athlete story lines. Check out the d leagues web presence. It is actually better than the NBA's (all due to D League hiring Work & Co, the best digital agency in U.S.) But at long last, the NBA will factor in more than just individual story lines to grow the game.

Sounds like everybody is about to get their wish. I hope I'm wrong about how this will eventually affect college ball.

 

[CusefanATL]

I didn't see this posted. Whether it was or not I am posting again, maybe it will stimulate a different discussion regarding the guys that are declaring now that don't seem to be first round locks.

Arn Tellem outlines his proposal for changes to the D-League and draft system that are aimed at developing the D-League into a true minor league talent feeder for the NBA.

Among his ideas:

- Roll back the minimum draft age to 18
- Give teams salary cap relief for players they decide to send to the D league
- Instead of declaring and immediately losing further eligibility players would only lose eligibility if they were in fact drafted
- All early entry players would have the same declaration date; currently American players have to declare almost two months earlier than International players.
- First rounders would be paid rookie scale regardless of whether they played in the NBA or D-League. The Thunder's 1st Round pick Josh Heustis (29th overall) was forced to accept assignment to the D-League at a D-League scale salary for his rookie year.
- Teams would be forced to offer 2nd rounders a guaranteed minimum contract or lose the rights to a player; apparently that is not the case today.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/d...e-necessary-plan-to-fix-the-nbas-farm-system/


Does anyone know the NCAA's justification for forcing players to give up their eligibility to go through the draft process? I understand why the NBA would support this, but don't understand why the NCAA would other than the NBA wants them to.

This would probably kill college basketball

 

[sufandu]

Stability for college ball seems to be the common thread in arguments. What am I not seeing that everyone else is? Where is the lack of stability? Because guys leave earlier than expected, sometimes? I realize that this response could be seen as snarky as it's hard to interpret text sometime but please know I'm honestly trying to see what apparently everyone except me sees.

It's mostly the guys leaving early. It was one thing when the guys everyone expected like Melo left early, but now that the NBA drafts anyone that's tall and can jump, guys nobody would've expected 5 years ago are jumping early. Unless you're John Calipari it makes it hard to build a team since guys don't even stick around long enough to develop anymore. It's tough on fans because we don't get to know players like we used to. For some people that may not be a big deal, but for a lot of fans, watching guys grow to the point of being able to lead a team to a great season is part of the fanhood. Or seeing a guy have a great year and anticipating how much fun it will be to watch again is another. It's hard to remember a guy that had an exciting season that stuck around after that season.

 

[CraigForth]

It's mostly the guys leaving early. It was one thing when the guys everyone expected like Melo left early, but now that the NBA drafts anyone that's tall and can jump, guys nobody would've expected 5 years ago are jumping early. Unless you're John Calipari it makes it hard to build a team since guys don't even stick around long enough to develop anymore. It's tough on fans because we don't get to know players like we used to. For some people that may not be a big deal, but for a lot of fans, watching guys grow to the point of being able to lead a team to a great season is part of the fanhood. Or seeing a guy have a great year and anticipating how much fun it will be to watch again is another. It's hard to remember a guy that had an exciting season that stuck around after that season.

So would you rather the talent level dropped to the point where nobody is good enough to ever go pro, or at least not until they're seniors? College basketball has a lot of opportunities, officiating changes, shot clock etc. but making changes that discourage the countries best players from playing in it isn't one of them. IMO obviously I'm one of the few who thinks this.

 

[AlaskaSU]

It's mostly the guys leaving early. It was one thing when the guys everyone expected like Melo left early, but now that the NBA drafts anyone that's tall and can jump, guys nobody would've expected 5 years ago are jumping early. Unless you're John Calipari it makes it hard to build a team since guys don't even stick around long enough to develop anymore. It's tough on fans because we don't get to know players like we used to. For some people that may not be a big deal, but for a lot of fans, watching guys grow to the point of being able to lead a team to a great season is part of the fanhood. Or seeing a guy have a great year and anticipating how much fun it will be to watch again is another. It's hard to remember a guy that had an exciting season that stuck around after that season.

For those few that can't understand what is wrong with one and done; imagine if every NBA star changed teams every year. What do you think that would do to the popularity of the NBA? One and done will diminish college basketball. The proposed solution, a farm team system, would be a fatal cure. The only solution is a 3 year rule, but what incentive is there for the NBA to make a change? If the pros owned the p5 college teams, they would have incentive to protect the game and adopt a 3 year rule. Say hello to the Cuseknicks. The colleges could collect rent for the use of their facilities. If I remember, some financial magazine recently valued us at around 230 million. That would make a nice endowment - unless we have not learned anything from the last time we blew the endowment.

 

[SWC75]

Agree to disagree I guess. If you think that college would remain as popular as it is today without really talented players (some of whom will be in the NBA someday) then I don't know how to respond. Its ok to be nostalgic about the good ole days when players stayed for 3 or 4 years, but, to assume that the sport would not decline in popularity if there was another league (viable D-League) that had the superior talent then I don't know what to say. I think you are creating a straw man by suggesting people have interest in college only because of the name on the Jersey. I think people choose to root for teams based on the name on the Jersey, they do not however choose to be interested in the sport in general based on a name on a Jersey.

The success of college sports has always been based on the smaller markets they represent that are not represented by the major pro leagues. It's not about 4 or 5 star players. 90% of college teams don't have them anyway. And the ones that do don't have them for long. As long as the markets are there college sports and college fans will be there.

 

[AlaskaSU]

The success of college sports has always been based on the smaller markets they represent that are not represented by the major pro leagues. It's not about 4 or 5 star players. 90% of college teams don't have them anyway. And the ones that do don't have them for long. As long as the markets are there college sports and college fans will be there.

There are in essence two types of fans: 1) people with allegiance to the school whether by attendance or geography, and 2) national fans that have no tangible ties but are attracted to the brand. One and done is a detriment to the latter. The effects are most likely to show up as a decrease in TV revenue for in season broadcasts. The NCAA tourney is less vulnerable.

 

[CraigForth]

I don't see a problem with the situation as it exists (one-and-done), I also don't see a problem with allowing kids to go directly to the pros if they want, I also don't see a problem with requiring them to stay 2 years or 3 years. I have argued against none of these scenarios. My issue stems from having another viable alternative for kids who aren't yet ready for the pro game. I believe that would become a big problem for college basketball. My preference is to watch the highly talented kids play college for at least a year, I like to watch their game and try and project them to the NBA, will they be good on the next level, will they even get a chance etc. Will college basketball fans still root for their team? Sure they will, especially alumni. I believe that the casual fan, the ones that tune in around March - of which there are many- are looking to watch next year's top picks and Cinderella stories and all the things that interest people who don't tune in to Conference or Non-Conf games. I think with the addition of a viable NBADL, if they were able to convert those guys into pros, you could see college become a fall back option. Right now its March that pays the bills in college basketball, if that were to lose traction it would be a problem for the sport in general. If eventually games became hard to find on TV because ESPN made a deal with the NBA and NBADL etc. that could be a death blow.

I realize that I am operating in hypotheticals and many what if scenarios, but I believe that I am still operating under the spirit of the original post which was hypothetically describing things that could be done the make the D-League better; which I believe for the many reasons I've stated, would ultimately be bad for college basketball. I have gotten a lot of push back but none of it directed at the thesis of my post, everything has to do with kids leaving early or the idea that highly talented kids don't drive viewership.

 

[Hoo's That]

I don't know the answer but, if I had to guess, I would guess that the coaches pushed for it so they could have more certainty as to their rosters.

Way back when, the only guys going were sure-fire high first round picks and I would think that coaches would have pushed to know as early as possible whether that player was leaving or not...

Just a guess...

I believe you're correct. Coaches' perspective: It's awfully hard to get to work on next year's team, especially with regard to recruiting, when you don't even know who' s on the team until June.

I wouldn't doubt the coach aspect, but the big thing that also makes them lose their eligibility is hiring an agent. Once you do that you're no longer an amateur in anything in the eyes of the NCAA. The baseball players who leave the minors and come back to college and play another sport like Danny Kannell (sp) could do so because they did not have an agent for baseball and negotiated their own contracts.

 

[sufandu]

For those few that can't understand what is wrong with one and done; imagine if every NBA star changed teams every year. What do you think that would do to the popularity of the NBA? One and done will diminish college basketball. The proposed solution, a farm team system, would be a fatal cure. The only solution is a 3 year rule, but what incentive is there for the NBA to make a change? If the pros owned the p5 college teams, they would have incentive to protect the game and adopt a 3 year rule. Say hello to the Cuseknicks. The colleges could collect rent for the use of their facilities. If I remember, some financial magazine recently valued us at around 230 million. That would make a nice endowment - unless we have not learned anything from the last time we blew the endowment.

I think the NBA would love a 3 year rule. It's the PA that doesn't.

 

[Dave85]

I didn't see this posted. Whether it was or not I am posting again, maybe it will stimulate a different discussion regarding the guys that are declaring now that don't seem to be first round locks.

Arn Tellem outlines his proposal for changes to the D-League and draft system that are aimed at developing the D-League into a true minor league talent feeder for the NBA.

Among his ideas:

- Roll back the minimum draft age to 18
- Give teams salary cap relief for players they decide to send to the D league
- Instead of declaring and immediately losing further eligibility players would only lose eligibility if they were in fact drafted
- All early entry players would have the same declaration date; currently American players have to declare almost two months earlier than International players.
- First rounders would be paid rookie scale regardless of whether they played in the NBA or D-League. The Thunder's 1st Round pick Josh Heustis (29th overall) was forced to accept assignment to the D-League at a D-League scale salary for his rookie year.
- Teams would be forced to offer 2nd rounders a guaranteed minimum contract or lose the rights to a player; apparently that is not the case today.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/d...e-necessary-plan-to-fix-the-nbas-farm-system/


Does anyone know the NCAA's justification for forcing players to give up their eligibility to go through the draft process? I understand why the NBA would support this, but don't understand why the NCAA would other than the NBA wants them to.

I would like the NCAA do something meaningful for a change to improve CBB. How about NCAA makes a deal with the CBB to share some of the 1 billion dollars in ad revenues from the NCAA tournament in exchange for not drafting CBB players until after two years. In other words, pay the NBA not to vulture CBB!

 

[Dave85]

I would like the NCAA do something meaningful for a change to improve CBB. How about NCAA makes a deal with the CBB to share some of the 1 billion dollars in ad revenues from the NCAA tournament in exchange for not drafting CBB players until after two years. In other words, pay the NBA not to vulture CBB!

btw, you have to say the word "vulture" with your best DellPlain accent. Oy vey!

 

[sufandu]

So would you rather the talent level dropped to the point where nobody is good enough to ever go pro, or at least not until they're seniors? College basketball has a lot of opportunities, officiating changes, shot clock etc. but making changes that discourage the countries best players from playing in it isn't one of them. IMO obviously I'm one of the few who thinks this.

That's not at all what I said. The NBA doesn't draft based on who is ready to play now. They draft based on who may be ready in 2-3 years. Those guys used to stay in college and be studs then go to the NBA and were instant studs. Look at the difference between Anthony Davis's rookie numbers compared to David Robinson's, Patrick Ewing's, Shaquille O'Neil's. The system was ideal for college and the NBA back then, but it's never going back there again. I think a system where fans actually knew the good players on their team would be better than what we have now. Of course the other things you mentioned are necessary too.

 

[Dave85]

That's not at all what I said. The NBA doesn't draft based on who is ready to play now. They draft based on who may be ready in 2-3 years. Those guys used to stay in college and be studs then go to the NBA and were instant studs. Look at the difference between Anthony Davis's rookie numbers compared to David Robinson's, Patrick Ewing's, Shaquille O'Neil's. The system was ideal for college and the NBA back then, but it's never going back there again. I think a system where fans actually knew the good players on their team would be better than what we have now. Of course the other things you mentioned are necessary too.

I think it's really in the NCAA's interest to get players to stay in school.

 

[Dave85]

btw, CJ Fair is doing awesome right now!

 

[SWC75]

That's not at all what I said. The NBA doesn't draft based on who is ready to play now. They draft based on who may be ready in 2-3 years. Those guys used to stay in college and be studs then go to the NBA and were instant studs. Look at the difference between Anthony Davis's rookie numbers compared to David Robinson's, Patrick Ewing's, Shaquille O'Neil's. The system was ideal for college and the NBA back then, but it's never going back there again. I think a system where fans actually knew the good players on their team would be better than what we have now. Of course the other things you mentioned are necessary too.

Sometimes i think the NBA drafts based on where the dart lands.

 

[pfister1]

I think the NBA would love a 3 year rule. It's the PA that doesn't.

I'm not saying you aren't right, but this makes no sense to me. The PA represents the interests of guys in the league. They shouldn't have a huge interest in how guys who have yet to even be drafted are treated.

 

[CraigForth]

That's not at all what I said. The NBA doesn't draft based on who is ready to play now. They draft based on who may be ready in 2-3 years. Those guys used to stay in college and be studs then go to the NBA and were instant studs. Look at the difference between Anthony Davis's rookie numbers compared to David Robinson's, Patrick Ewing's, Shaquille O'Neil's. The system was ideal for college and the NBA back then, but it's never going back there again. I think a system where fans actually knew the good players on their team would be better than what we have now. Of course the other things you mentioned are necessary too.

Great point, and I agree it was better when guys stayed. Unfortunately the horse is out of the barn on that. Also, and I don't mean to belabor the point, but my argument about talent level in college being reduced is based on the hypothetical that the NBADL makes something of itself, thereby allowing the best high school prospects the ability to get paid while being seasoned for the NBA and not have to go to those pesky classes. I think I've failed to properly communicate my point.

 

[sufandu]

Great point, and I agree it was better when guys stayed. Unfortunately the horse is out of the barn on that. Also, and I don't mean to belabor the point, but my argument about talent level in college being reduced is based on the hypothetical that the NBADL makes something of itself, thereby allowing the best high school prospects the ability to get paid while being seasoned for the NBA and not have to go to those pesky classes. I think I've failed to properly communicate my point.

I think I got that. Where we probably disagree is the extent. I assume the NBA wouldn't want it to be a full MLB like minor league system so it would keep the numbers low enough to send enough good talent to college. Of course we'll never know unless it were to actually happen.