Will Foster break Pullen's scoring title?

[Trim]

How many players have been hurt by this rule? Any?

All of the ones who could've/should've been making money in the NBA a year earlier.

It's ridiculous that the one-and-done types who NBA experts say are ready after completing high school (or earlier) are going to college because of an arbitrary rule that says NBA players need to be a year out of high school, which is in place for dubious reasons.  My impression is that most current one-and-dones consist of kids who would go pro w/o the one if allowed, as opposed to kids who chose to go to college and/or weren't good enough to go pro and then were so good there in one year that the situation changed and they go pro. 

In other words, even with no rule, I feel that the "baseball rule" would essentially be in effect if there was no rule.  The elites who otherwise would be "one and done" would go pro right away, and the college players would play in college and develop until they've become NBA-worthy, likely in more than one year.  If there's  an exceptional scenario, there'd be no rules arbitrarily allowing for the surprise freshman stud to go pro rather than be stuck in college for 2 more years for no reason.

And there'll be dumbass kids who overvalue themselves and go pro right away and lose their eligibility, and dumbass NBA teams who take them, but the free market will eventually smarten everyone up.

I'm pro rule because I want at least some protection for the athletes. When there was no early entry rule it was too easy for kids to get bad advice and then flame out and it happened way more than it should have. So if you're a high school senior and wanted to test your NBA worth, for most you can't get an actual read until you workout for scouts and go to draft camps. The problem with that is once you do these things you lose your college eligibility. So if you get hurt in the spring or just got bad advice that you're NBA ready when you're not, then you're stuck. I'm all about free market correction but not when that market is slanted to hurt the disadvantaged at a disproportionate rate.

The issue isn't a rich owner or gm missing on a prospect but it's that prospect sitting at home because some agent gave out some poor advice, trying to get more cash.

I'm pretty much OK with kids in 2014 who can't figure out if they're NBA-ready or not getting mumped.  But if others care about it, there's plenty of fixes that could be implemented along with eliminating the one-and-done rule to alleviate that concern.

[kso_FAN]

Protecting bad NBA owners/GMs from making bad decisions about 18-year-old prospects just frees up more time for them to make bad decisions about everything else.

Of course it does. I agree completely with MIR's rationale for the rule, but the owners didn't make the rule to protect the kids from bad advice or their own poor evaluations. Many/most owners/GMs were probably relieved that they weren't going to be "forced" to take a chance on the next Garnett, Koby, or LeBron. They get another year to evaluate talent against better competition and reduce (but not eliminate) the chance at the many mistakes made in the 2000s.


As a result, I don't think the rule is going away anytime soon.

[MakeItRain]

Its about marketing for the NBA.  Having the entire sports world talking about Andrew Wiggins for an entire year, rather than just a month or two before draft, creates fans that follow the kid once he moves on to the NBA.

The only argument worse than this one about the NBA entry rules is that NBA entry rules are racist.

The amount of actual money the NBA makes from having these guys in college is astronomically tiny. Do you really think Wiggins being at KU for a couple of months will make the KU fan who is not already a NBA consumer suddenly become one? How many K-State fans do you know went out and purchased Miami Heat or Boston Celtics jerseys in 2008? Quick, where's Cartier Martin? For the most part college fans and NBA fans are very different. Most NBA fans can't stand the relatively poor quality of NCAA basketball.

I think that there is a portion of fanbases that will follow their guy, yes.  As for that portion being astronomically tiny, I don't know.  I have never heard/read a story speaking to that.  If you have that info, I would be interested in seeing it.

Follow for a bit, sure but they're not following in a way that's making money for the league, there was a reason I used the phrase "become a consumer." As for the info, I'll default to I the common sense that life presents us. Do you know anyone who became a NBA consumer because of a college player who got drafted? I don't. I bet we couldn't find 10 people on this board who brought a jersey or the NBA tv package because Beasley and Walker were drafted.

[Trim]

Many/most owners/GMs were probably relieved that they weren't going to be "forced" to take a chance on the next Garnett, Koby, or LeBron. They get another year to evaluate talent against better competition and reduce (but not eliminate) the chance at the many mistakes made in the 2000s.

I want those relieved owners/GMs who don't want to or can't make tough decisions to suffer and the stud owners/GMs to thrive.  Survival of the fittest.

[MakeItRain]

I'm pretty much OK with kids in 2014 who can't figure out if they're NBA-ready or not getting mumped.  But if others care about it, there's plenty of fixes that could be implemented along with eliminating the one-and-done rule to alleviate that concern.

the fixes involve the NBA completely changing their calendar or the NCAA changing rules on what constitutes an amateur

[catzacker]

I want a go or stay 3years rule for a selfish reasons.  And so should most of you unless you have a son who is really good at basketball.

[michigancat]

Its about marketing for the NBA.  Having the entire sports world talking about Andrew Wiggins for an entire year, rather than just a month or two before draft, creates fans that follow the kid once he moves on to the NBA.

The only argument worse than this one about the NBA entry rules is that NBA entry rules are racist.

The amount of actual money the NBA makes from having these guys in college is astronomically tiny. Do you really think Wiggins being at KU for a couple of months will make the KU fan who is not already a NBA consumer suddenly become one? How many K-State fans do you know went out and purchased Miami Heat or Boston Celtics jerseys in 2008? Quick, where's Cartier Martin? For the most part college fans and NBA fans are very different. Most NBA fans can't stand the relatively poor quality of NCAA basketball.

I think that there is a portion of fanbases that will follow their guy, yes.  As for that portion being astronomically tiny, I don't know.  I have never heard/read a story speaking to that.  If you have that info, I would be interested in seeing it.

Follow for a bit, sure but they're not following in a way that's making money for the league, there was a reason I used the phrase "become a consumer." As for the info, I'll default to I the common sense that life presents us. Do you know anyone who became a NBA consumer because of a college player who got drafted? I don't. I bet we couldn't find 10 people on this board who brought a jersey or the NBA tv package because Beasley and Walker were drafted.

What marketing has the NBA done in the last 10 years that has had more of an impact domestically than the one-and-done rule?

[michigancat]

I want a go or stay 3years rule for a selfish reasons.  And so should most of you unless you have a son who is really good at basketball.

It affects us very little. Because of that, I'm erring on the side of what is right.

[Trim]

I'm pretty much OK with kids in 2014 who can't figure out if they're NBA-ready or not getting mumped.  But if others care about it, there's plenty of fixes that could be implemented along with eliminating the one-and-done rule to alleviate that concern.

the fixes involve the NBA completely changing their calendar or the NCAA changing rules on what constitutes an amateur

Yes, the draft would have to be a little later, and I'm thinking there'd be some sort of combine/camp thing that prospects could go to without eligibility risk.  When there's a few hundred dudes at the camp, if a kid can't figure out that there's 60 draft spots and only 30 that get guaranteed contracts and make the right decision, eff him.

[TownieCat]

What marketing has the NBA done in the last 10 years that has had more of an impact domestically than the one-and-done rule?

The dress code.

[MakeItRain]

Its about marketing for the NBA.  Having the entire sports world talking about Andrew Wiggins for an entire year, rather than just a month or two before draft, creates fans that follow the kid once he moves on to the NBA.

The only argument worse than this one about the NBA entry rules is that NBA entry rules are racist.

The amount of actual money the NBA makes from having these guys in college is astronomically tiny. Do you really think Wiggins being at KU for a couple of months will make the KU fan who is not already a NBA consumer suddenly become one? How many K-State fans do you know went out and purchased Miami Heat or Boston Celtics jerseys in 2008? Quick, where's Cartier Martin? For the most part college fans and NBA fans are very different. Most NBA fans can't stand the relatively poor quality of NCAA basketball.

I think that there is a portion of fanbases that will follow their guy, yes.  As for that portion being astronomically tiny, I don't know.  I have never heard/read a story speaking to that.  If you have that info, I would be interested in seeing it.

Follow for a bit, sure but they're not following in a way that's making money for the league, there was a reason I used the phrase "become a consumer." As for the info, I'll default to I the common sense that life presents us. Do you know anyone who became a NBA consumer because of a college player who got drafted? I don't. I bet we couldn't find 10 people on this board who brought a jersey or the NBA tv package because Beasley and Walker were drafted.

What marketing has the NBA done in the last 10 years that has had more of an impact domestically than the one-and-done rule?

For this conversation we'll just suspend the fact that the NBAPA selected the one-and-done rule and act like it was a marketing edict from the league office. I'd say that Stern's rule on bench and post game dress is #1. Their smart tv deal as second, and I'd list the league's modern social media policies along with aggressive & witty advertising marketing as third.

[AbeFroman]

Mods please change thread title to "Will Foster breaking Pullen's scoring title lead to an revamp of the NBA one and done rule?"

[michigancat]

For this conversation we'll just suspend the fact that the NBAPA selected the one-and-done rule and act like it was a marketing edict from the league office. I'd say that Stern's rule on bench and post game dress is #1. Their smart tv deal as second, and I'd list the league's modern social media policies along with aggressive & witty advertising marketing as third.

You really think the dress code had more of an impact?

[cfbandyman]

Barring injuries and Dillard's, I think he's got a fantastic shot, even if he only makes moderate gains to his scoring he'll probably get it. Though, Pullen had a fantastic advantage in terms of post season play, Foster may or may not get the same benefit, even playing one extra post season game in both the NCAA and the Pepper at a 15.4 ppg average over 4 years gives about 123 points, and that ain't nothing.

[michigancat]

Barring injuries and Dillard's, I think he's got a fantastic shot, even if he only makes moderate gains to his scoring he'll probably get it. Though, Pullen had a fantastic advantage in terms of post season play, Foster may or may not get the same benefit, even playing one extra post season game in both the NCAA and the Pepper at a 15.4 ppg average over 4 years gives about 123 points, and that ain't nothing.

he could transfer, too.

[Trim]

Mods please change thread title to "Will Foster breaking Pullen's scoring title lead to an revamp of the NBA one and done rule?"

When there aren't a bunch of people posting, someone can mod he rule talk to its own thread.

[cfbandyman]

Barring injuries and Dillard's, I think he's got a fantastic shot, even if he only makes moderate gains to his scoring he'll probably get it. Though, Pullen had a fantastic advantage in terms of post season play, Foster may or may not get the same benefit, even playing one extra post season game in both the NCAA and the Pepper at a 15.4 ppg average over 4 years gives about 123 points, and that ain't nothing.

he could transfer, too.

That too, but I don't want to think about it 

[Trim]

The union, which consists of existing NBA players, should want the rule to prevent players from entering for as long as possible, preserving jobs and extending careers.

Elites, both in evaluating and playing, should be rewarded at the expense of losery owners/GMs and journeymen.

[MakeItRain]

For this conversation we'll just suspend the fact that the NBAPA selected the one-and-done rule and act like it was a marketing edict from the league office. I'd say that Stern's rule on bench and post game dress is #1. Their smart tv deal as second, and I'd list the league's modern social media policies along with aggressive & witty advertising marketing as third.

You really think the dress code had more of an impact?

Considering the timing yes, after the malice at the palace and A.I. the league had a serious perception issue. The dress code detracted from the thug culture that many felt infiltrated the league. I'd also add that the league strengthening the rules and lengthening the suspensions for fighting also helped. I've heard Stephen A. Smith and Bomani Jones echo similar sentiments about the dress code. You're never wrong though so I'm sure you'll continue to argue that the dress code is insignificant to its current perception.

[michigancat]

For this conversation we'll just suspend the fact that the NBAPA selected the one-and-done rule and act like it was a marketing edict from the league office. I'd say that Stern's rule on bench and post game dress is #1. Their smart tv deal as second, and I'd list the league's modern social media policies along with aggressive & witty advertising marketing as third.

You really think the dress code had more of an impact?

Considering the timing yes, after the malice at the palace and A.I. the league had a serious perception issue. The dress code detracted from the thug culture that many felt infiltrated the league. I'd also add that the league strengthening the rules and lengthening the suspensions for fighting also helped. I've heard Stephen A. Smith and Bomani Jones echo similar sentiments about the dress code. You're never wrong though so I'm sure you'll continue to argue that the dress code is insignificant to its current perception.

I'm sure it had a positive impact, I just think it pales in comparison to the one-and-done rule. (And I realize the one-and-done rule wasn't necessarily designed as a marketing tool.)

[Trim]

I'd also add that the league strengthening the rules and lengthening the suspensions for fighting also helped.

Any rule changes that you think would help the NBA game? For instance, sometimes they talk about instituting FIBA goaltending rules in the NBA. Any thoughts on that or any other changes that would help the game play?

The goaltending? It definitely wouldn’t help. You have too many athletic guys in this league that would tip the ball out of the rim, so pretty much to make a basket you will need to swish it, you know what I’m saying?

I would say I would loosen up a little bit the rules about the fighting fines. That’s what I would loosen up. Because today you go to an ice hockey game, and the one thing they’re waiting for is a fight, you know what I’m saying? So if they could set it up something like that in the NBA. That if there are two guys and they have a problem, if they could just separate everybody. And these two people that have problem, if they could fight ...

During the game?

During the game. Quick, 15-20 seconds, throw few punches, then referees jump in and break this thing up. I think the game ... these two guys, they resolved their problem. They’re both suspended and they’re leaving. But end of the day, they fix the problem between each other, fans are super excited, and I think that would be a pretty cool idea [chuckles].

You’d need bigger refs. You couldn’t have Dick Bavetta out there.

At some point when the referees jump in, then you’d have to stop. You’d have to stop. So I think that would be a great idea, just like the ice hockey fans waiting for that, that’s would NBA fans would get into, as well.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/66595/throwing-down-the-polish-hammer

[kso_FAN]

Barring injuries and Dillard's, I think he's got a fantastic shot, even if he only makes moderate gains to his scoring he'll probably get it. Though, Pullen had a fantastic advantage in terms of post season play, Foster may or may not get the same benefit, even playing one extra post season game in both the NCAA and the Pepper at a 15.4 ppg average over 4 years gives about 123 points, and that ain't nothing.

he could transfer, too.

Nick Williams 2. 

If he stays at K-State (I think he will) and plays for 4 years (avoiding major injury) he will be at worst 3rd on the career list (behind Pullen and Evans). He's already averaging more PPG than Pullen did as a SO and its likely he'll average near 20 PPG his JR and SR year with even nominal improvement. The fact that he's a 40% 3PT shooter already bodes well for him and I think he'll get better on 2s and getting to the FT line.

[MakeItRain]

For this conversation we'll just suspend the fact that the NBAPA selected the one-and-done rule and act like it was a marketing edict from the league office. I'd say that Stern's rule on bench and post game dress is #1. Their smart tv deal as second, and I'd list the league's modern social media policies along with aggressive & witty advertising marketing as third.

You really think the dress code had more of an impact?

Considering the timing yes, after the malice at the palace and A.I. the league had a serious perception issue. The dress code detracted from the thug culture that many felt infiltrated the league. I'd also add that the league strengthening the rules and lengthening the suspensions for fighting also helped. I've heard Stephen A. Smith and Bomani Jones echo similar sentiments about the dress code. You're never wrong though so I'm sure you'll continue to argue that the dress code is insignificant to its current perception.

I'm sure it had a positive impact, I just think it pales in comparison to the one-and-done rule. (And I realize the one-and-done rule wasn't necessarily designed as a marketing tool.)

I'll ask you the same question I asked cns; do you know a bunch of people buying jerseys and league pass when players from their university get drafted? K-State is the perfect example because we aren't a program that would get one and done players and we had 2 at once and we didn't convert any college fans to NBA consumers. You think schools like KU, UK, and UNC are pumping out NBA fans that would make any discernable impact on the league's bottom line? How many people do you think are walking around Kentucky in Pelicans jerseys?

[Bloodfart]

I'd also add that the league strengthening the rules and lengthening the suspensions for fighting also helped.

Any rule changes that you think would help the NBA game? For instance, sometimes they talk about instituting FIBA goaltending rules in the NBA. Any thoughts on that or any other changes that would help the game play?

The goaltending? It definitely wouldn’t help. You have too many athletic guys in this league that would tip the ball out of the rim, so pretty much to make a basket you will need to swish it, you know what I’m saying?

I would say I would loosen up a little bit the rules about the fighting fines. That’s what I would loosen up. Because today you go to an ice hockey game, and the one thing they’re waiting for is a fight, you know what I’m saying? So if they could set it up something like that in the NBA. That if there are two guys and they have a problem, if they could just separate everybody. And these two people that have problem, if they could fight ...

During the game?

During the game. Quick, 15-20 seconds, throw few punches, then referees jump in and break this thing up. I think the game ... these two guys, they resolved their problem. They’re both suspended and they’re leaving. But end of the day, they fix the problem between each other, fans are super excited, and I think that would be a pretty cool idea [chuckles].

You’d need bigger refs. You couldn’t have Dick Bavetta out there.

At some point when the referees jump in, then you’d have to stop. You’d have to stop. So I think that would be a great idea, just like the ice hockey fans waiting for that, that’s would NBA fans would get into, as well.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/66595/throwing-down-the-polish-hammer

 

[The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep]

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/66595/throwing-down-the-polish-hammer