Lydon to hire agent and enter NBA draft

[shandeezy7]

But you're not speaking from the perspective of an athlete. You're just a guy who oddly has a problem with college basketball players earning money.

You're posting on a fan board of a college basketball program. So I'm assuming you're a fan. As a fan, why would you want to encourage talented players to not play college ball? Why wouldn't you hope that those in charge do whatever is necessary and most logical to attract talent and encourage them to remain in the programs for as long as possible?

I'm more annoyed by talented players wanting to have it both ways in college. Go there for free, live there for free, get the connections for free and get the unmatched free exposure while also wanting to profit off of an image that wouldn't be worth squat if it weren't for the school giving them that exposure. They don't have to partake in any of it if they don't think it's fair and there are plenty of opportunities for them to not partake in it. So, as I've said before in this thread, these athletes obviously see a great value in attending college even without receiving a dime in tangible money.

 

[310Pigpen]

What SU players have been treated like a god the past few years? Only guy I can think of is Melo.

Andrew white looked like he was treated like a god at one of the sororities by the comments from one of his Instagram posts.

 

[Melancer46]

I just find it funny, because the bar keeps going lower, it used to be if your a lottery pick you have to go, then if your a first round pick you go, now its a 2nd round pick, pretty soon anyone breathing is going to enter the draft.

I would say it's more like:

- Lottery pick - definitely go no matter who you are
- First round pick - Should probably go, especially if your stock has peaked.
- 2nd round pick - If your stock will never go up, it's fine, otherwise, you might as well return

As someone that believes Lydon's stock will only fall if he returns, I think it's wise to go either way.

 

[tbonezone]

you're not going to look back and remember your games with the minnetonka melon ballers. tourney games you will remember the rest of your life. and there's no going back once you sign. money ain't everything. and if you think your game will slip next year...i don't want you back .anyone think melo or lydon don't get signed the next year?

 

[chugg21]

If everyone could get past our selfish perspectives then we wouldn't need to have 5 different huge threads every time someone leaves early. I can't even think of a single of our early entry guys that have made a decision that didnt work out well for them since Harris/Devo who didn't really have much of a choice.

 

[W'boro'Cuse315]

Tyler's doing an autograph signing down the street from where I live in Yorkville this Saturday. Haven't read through the thread on whether he's signed with an agent or not but this would obviously end his amateurism. I look forward to meeting him & following his NBA career.

Met Lawrence Moten here & Gerry is scheduled for April 13th

 

[PauliePeppas]

^ Yea we can all stop dreaming now

 

[MSOrange]

Tyler's doing an autograph signing down the street from where I live in Yorkville this Saturday. Haven't read through the thread on whether he's signed with an agent or not but this would obviously end his amateurism. I look forward to meeting him & following his NBA career.

Met Lawrence Moten here & Gerry is scheduled for April 13th

View attachment 94469

Well that pretty much makes it as official as it can get.

 

[Briancuse]

What SU players have been treated like a god the past few years? Only guy I can think of is Melo.

I'm sure they are all treated pretty well around campus.

 

[billsin01]

If everyone could get past our selfish perspectives then we wouldn't need to have 5 different huge threads every time someone leaves early. I can't even think of a single of our early entry guys that have made a decision that didnt work out well for them since Harris/Devo who didn't really have much of a choice.

It depends on how you view it. Selfish? Certainly -- we all want these dudes to stick around. But I look at a guy like Waiters or MCW and say even though you could have made a pretty solid argument for their returning for one reason or another, that it worked out pretty darn well. They were clearly ready for the level of competition even if they still had work to do on their games.

But for Grant, McCullough, Richardson and Fab (and Lydon may join this group if he drops to round 2)? I don't know. In terms of draft position, Grant is probably the only one you can question. But in terms of being ready for the game at that level? I'm not sure. I mean, I tend to view 30+ games of college ball at close to 40 mpg as the main focus or one of the main guys on a team as every bit as valuable developmentally as d!cking around in the D League or trying to work on your game in practice at the NBA level.

I am in favor of lifting the one-and-done restriction but I'm sure draft status should be the end-all and be-all in terms of making these decisions. Just my two cents.

 

[billsin01]

In theory, going straight to the D-League does make sense. The fact that no one is really doing it, though, speaks volumes.

It's a much more viable option when (or if) the D League actually becomes a developmental pipeline to the NBA. Not that everyone is going to make it but at this point it's a place to stash guys rather than a league that develops the league's better prospects.

 

[billsin01]

The NCAA loves that there are still those out there who hold these backward and outdated views.

$2.8 million -- the average lifetime value (in 1999 dollars) of a college degree. And that number is spread across all occupations (so sociology, social work, teaching, etc.) and not weighted for quality of the institution, alumni connections, etc. Between the ages of 25-32, the salary delta between those with a college degree and those without is $17,500 per year. That gap only gets larger as the ages increase.

Add to that a really key point that many of these kids are getting into and attending universities they either never would have dreamed of gaining admission to based on test scores and/or couldn't have afforded to attend even if they gained acceptance.

So what's the point? It's not that kids shouldn't go pro whenever they feel like it. It's also not that there can't be tweaks to the system (like a full cost scholarship that includes books, room and board, some sort of small stipend, etc.).

But the idea that these kids are getting screwed b/c they make 'no money' is absolutely absurd. I mean, no one is making the argument that kids in D3 should get paid are they? I mean, where do the universities even get that money?

And, for the record, paying all athletes is every bit as unfair as paying no athletes in that there are very few of these kids that are marketable on their own. Yet you're going to pay them all equally?

 

[billsin01]

I would say it's more like:

- Lottery pick - definitely go no matter who you are
- First round pick - Should probably go, especially if your stock has peaked.
- 2nd round pick - If your stock will never go up, it's fine, otherwise, you might as well return

As someone that believes Lydon's stock will only fall if he returns, I think it's wise to go either way.

Don't disagree with this breakdown but I'd add that draft status is odd as the sole determining factor. If you can improve, you have a better chance of sticking. The NBA isn't going to wait around for you to develop unless you are a freak of an athlete or you find the perfect situation where you can be brought along really slowly (but those are rare). In Lydon's case, I'd agree that his stock isn't likely to change dramatically, but I think he has a world of potential to improve as an offensive player, which is the tool he needs to display at the next level.

Either way I wish him well. Seems like a good kid and hard to argue that he didn't give an awful lot to this program in two years.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

If everyone could get past our selfish perspectives then we wouldn't need to have 5 different huge threads every time someone leaves early. I can't even think of a single of our early entry guys that have made a decision that didnt work out well for them since Harris/Devo who didn't really have much of a choice.

"Everyone" is an overreach. Some of us actually want them to stay so that they can develop and be better prepared to make a more lasting professional impact. Lydon is the perfect case in point for me. I'm just not that attached to him as a player. I want him to stay, because i think he needs another year of development, but if he's leaving, i'm not very bothered by it. He'd be coming back to another not-so-good team, and who knows if he's enjoying his experience. Some commentator told a story about him just wanting to buy a ranch to fish and hunt, so getting to that dream may not even require him to stick in the NBA for all that long. Whatever it takes to make people happy, i say.

Now i'm looking forward to seeing what Moyer and Brissett can do in his stead, and hoping Tucker signs so we can have this conversation again next March.

 

[Cusefan0307]

He will need a huge combine to move up. There are a lot of very good skilled players in this draft.

There's like 13 mock drafts. We seem to take the one where the player is rated the lowest as gospel. All it takes is one team.

 

[orangenirvana]

$2.8 million -- the average lifetime value (in 1999 dollars) of a college degree. And that number is spread across all occupations (so sociology, social work, teaching, etc.) and not weighted for quality of the institution, alumni connections, etc. Between the ages of 25-32, the salary delta between those with a college degree and those without is $17,500 per year. That gap only gets larger as the ages increase.

Add to that a really key point that many of these kids are getting into and attending universities they either never would have dreamed of gaining admission to based on test scores and/or couldn't have afforded to attend even if they gained acceptance.

So what's the point? It's not that kids shouldn't go pro whenever they feel like it. It's also not that there can't be tweaks to the system (like a full cost scholarship that includes books, room and board, some sort of small stipend, etc.).

But the idea that these kids are getting screwed b/c they make 'no money' is absolutely absurd. I mean, no one is making the argument that kids in D3 should get paid are they? I mean, where do the universities even get that money?

And, for the record, paying all athletes is every bit as unfair as paying no athletes in that there are very few of these kids that are marketable on their own. Yet you're going to pay them all equally?

As a fan of college basketball, I don't want to kids to feel as if they have to "go pro whenever they feel like it." I want them to feel like playing college basketball is worth it and they aren't being exploited.

The point is to allow legal adults to profit while they are still playing for their college program. Like every other normal student. Allow them to earn something tangible while they are earning millions for their universities. Not just "hey, someday when you're old this free education will be well worth it." That future investment for the small number of players who plan to and will play professionally isn't very relevant as they are putting their all into the program while risking injury.

If you don't think colleges should be allowed to treat the athletes like paid university employees then what is the harm in allowing them to profit independently? Why can't kids continue playing for their program after being drafted if they still want to and their employer allows, hold offseason jobs, etc.?

 

[RF2044]

As a fan of college basketball, I don't want to kids to feel as if they have to "go pro whenever they feel like it." I want them to feel like playing college basketball is worth it and they aren't being exploited.

The point is to allow legal adults to profit while they are still playing for their college program. Like every other normal student. Allow them to earn something tangible while they are earning millions for their universities. Not just "hey, someday when you're old this free education will be well worth it." That future investment for the small number of players who plan to and will play professionally isn't very relevant as they are putting their all into the program while risking injury.

If you don't think colleges should be allowed to treat the athletes like paid university employees then what is the harm in allowing them to profit independently? Why can't kids continue playing for their program after being drafted if they still want to and their employer allows, hold offseason jobs, etc.?

The highlighted part of your post is one of the biggest hypocrisies perpetrated by the NCAA.

 

[Melancer46]

Don't disagree with this breakdown but I'd add that draft status is odd as the sole determining factor. If you can improve, you have a better chance of sticking. The NBA isn't going to wait around for you to develop unless you are a freak of an athlete or you find the perfect situation where you can be brought along really slowly (but those are rare). In Lydon's case, I'd agree that his stock isn't likely to change dramatically, but I think he has a world of potential to improve as an offensive player, which is the tool he needs to display at the next level.

Either way I wish him well. Seems like a good kid and hard to argue that he didn't give an awful lot to this program in two years.

This would depend on whether or not you think players are able to develop more in college than they do in the NBA. I would tend to lean towards the NBA being a more effective environment for development, especially in Lydon's case, who IMO, has more work to do in terms of his body development than he does his skill development.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

There's like 13 mock drafts. We seem to take the one where the player is rated the lowest as gospel. All it takes is one team.

Yeah I know. I love Lydon as much as anyone but he has a long way to go to even be considered ready for the NBA. He needs to show improvement physically and mentally.

 

[Cusefan0307]

This would depend on whether or not you think players are able to develop more in college than they do in the NBA. I would tend to lean towards the NBA being a more effective environment for development, especially in Lydon's case, who IMO, has more work to do in terms of his body development than he does his skill development.

This says a lot about Syracuse's S&C program, or lack thereof that is...

 

[billsin01]

As a fan of college basketball, I don't want to kids to feel as if they have to "go pro whenever they feel like it." I want them to feel like playing college basketball is worth it and they aren't being exploited.

The point is to allow legal adults to profit while they are still playing for their college program. Like every other normal student. Allow them to earn something tangible while they are earning millions for their universities. Not just "hey, someday when you're old this free education will be well worth it." That future investment for the small number of players who plan to and will play professionally isn't very relevant as they are putting their all into the program while risking injury.

If you don't think colleges should be allowed to treat the athletes like paid university employees then what is the harm in allowing them to profit independently? Why can't kids continue playing for their program after being drafted if they still want to and their employer allows, hold offseason jobs, etc.?

I'd LOVE for these guys to get offseason jobs. Think it would be really valuable for them. Also wish the universities actually pushed the education angle and encouraged kids to study abroad -- maybe even a summer program where it doesn't conflict with the schedule, etc. But in terms of fairness, I think the issue is you'd have to find some way to determine a kid's individual marketability, no? I mean, Johnny Manziel, as big a as he may be, was essentially a rock star. His starting LG? Not as much. I think Manziel should profit from that but it gets really really tricky in a practical sense b/c I"m not quite sure how you figure that.

But my broader point is simply that these kids are absolutely getting 'tangible' compensation in the form of the scholly and all the cost the universities incur to build and run the programs/facilities/training staffs/coaching staffs/communications staffs/nutritionists/strength and conditioning/travel costs, etc. So if you want to add a stipend on top, I suppose that's fine (or an all-inclusive scholarship type package). I'm just not sure it's 'fair' in a market compensation sense. The 'fair' thing would be to let De'Aaron Fox or whomever go straight from high school to the NBA if in fact they can get themselves signed with or drafted by a team.

 

[billsin01]

This would depend on whether or not you think players are able to develop more in college than they do in the NBA. I would tend to lean towards the NBA being a more effective environment for development, especially in Lydon's case, who IMO, has more work to do in terms of his body development than he does his skill development.

I would say realistically that's an answer on a case-by-case basis. So maybe your theory holds for Lydon but I'd argue Grant is getting zero opportunity to actually expand his offensive game -- the NBA simply doesn't need to help him grow that way. They turn him into a D/rebounding rotational piece and move on to the next guy.

Not saying it's wrong or that Grant was wrong for leaving (he's making good money playing hoops, for christ's sake) or even that Grant ever would have been an offensive threat at that level. Just that it's the reality.

The NBA as a source of development is very debateable, IMO -- I looked at the top 25 scorers a while back and only 4 of the top 25 had averaged less than 10 ppg their first year in the league and at least one of those, Lowry, was a PG (where skills other than scoring are valuable). Point being most successful players in the NBA are least pretty good (relative to other NBA players) from Day 1.

 

[Bayside44]

I would say realistically that's an answer on a case-by-case basis. So maybe your theory holds for Lydon but I'd argue Grant is getting zero opportunity to actually expand his offensive game -- the NBA simply doesn't need to help him grow that way. They turn him into a D/rebounding rotational piece and move on to the next guy.

Not saying it's wrong or that Grant was wrong for leaving (he's making good money playing hoops, for christ's sake) or even that Grant ever would have been an offensive threat at that level. Just that it's the reality.

The NBA as a source of development is very debateable, IMO -- I looked at the top 25 scorers a while back and only 4 of the top 25 had averaged less than 10 ppg their first year in the league and at least one of those, Lowry, was a PG (where skills other than scoring are valuable). Point being most successful players in the NBA are least pretty good (relative to other NBA players) from Day 1.

The Sixers and Thunder didn't and aren't running practices with their offense going through Grant, the Kings didn't with Malachi, etc...with jobs on the line coaches and staff don't have years to hope a guy "develops."

Grant's getting paid and it's fine, I guess, but the extra year he would've gotten the treatment our other big forwards have gotten to showcase and expand their range on offense.

 

[cuse10]

I'm more annoyed by talented players wanting to have it both ways in college. Go there for free, live there for free, get the connections for free and get the unmatched free exposure while also wanting to profit off of an image that wouldn't be worth squat if it weren't for the school giving them that exposure. They don't have to partake in any of it if they don't think it's fair and there are plenty of opportunities for them to not partake in it. So, as I've said before in this thread, these athletes obviously see a great value in attending college even without receiving a dime in tangible money.

It is not free. They earned everything that has been provided to them. Their scholarships are recouped multiple times over before they even play a game! Why is this hard to comprehend? Some of you have serious issues with this topic. If the prospect of compensating players who generate revenue bothers you that much, stop watching college athletics.

 

[billsin01]

The Sixers and Thunder didn't and aren't running practices with their offense going through Grant, the Kings didn't with Malachi, etc...with jobs on the line coaches and staff don't have years to hope a guy "develops."

Grant's getting paid and it's fine, I guess, but the extra year he would've gotten the treatment our other big forwards have gotten to showcase and expand their range on offense.

Both of these points are beyond debate. Now, you could argue that Grant still made the right call, and I'm OK with that. But if you watch OKC run it's offense in games -- they literally send Grant to the corner to draw his man as much as possible (not that his guy really guards him very much) and run the offense on the other side of the floor. he scores on put-backs, fast breaks and scramble situations. Nothing wrong with it, but does he find more of an offensive role if he gets another year to develop with the ball in his hands for 40 mpg for 30+ games? It's got to be a possibility, right?