Unproven Winners

The Problem

The NBA and NCAA are doing this little dance right now that is beneficial to no one, not even the fans. That little dance is in regards to the one and done players that clutter the NCAA. It is easy to see why it is such a negative for the NCAA, and if you really think about it is pretty obvious how it affects the NBA. So what the aim is today is to discuss the problems it is causing at both levels and then look at some of the possible fixes.

The NCAA has become the minor league for the NBA. Forget about the Development League (and most people have), the way the NCAA is promoted and hyped the D-League can’t compete.  That being said, the quality of basketball at top name schools has been dropping off and the landscape of college basketball is becoming more of a level playing field. Many people may think this is good for the game, but in all actuality I think the overall level of the college game has gone down because of no continuity from one year to the next. Now obviously players gradate, but at the top tier schools you are seeing less and less of their recruited students leaving after one or two years. Coach K tried his best to avoid the one-and-done players, but after several bad NCAA tournament appearances in the past few years (including one season that saw 2-seed Duke lose to a 15-seed in the first round), even coach K had to recruit a one-and-done. So again, while the NCAA level may seem more competitive, it is falling prey to poorer quality of play.

The NBA’s problem is much bigger, because it is one thing for colleges to borrow/use players for one year; it’s another for a pro team to base multi-million dollar future decisions based on seeing a player play at the prior level for only one year or two. Why do you think so many draft picks have not panned out since the one-and-done phenomenon has started. Not only have so many picks started to not pan out, but many of the top picks have not panned out.  This is a big problem plaguing the league because bad teams getting high picks that don’t pan out just means they stay bad which results in not being able to attract good free agents. But again, the main problem is not getting a good sense of what a college player will be at the NBA level because they don’t have a good enough sample-size.

The Solutions

The first solution is to change the mandate placed on graduating high school athletes. In my opinion, it makes more sense for the NBA to let these athletes get some experience at that level, but it also lets these young players develop as athletes and men. This will also help them establish a reputation and a resume for professional teams to evaluate them on, which will lead to less bad picks at the top of the draft.  Also, by either extending the time these players have to stay in college or eliminating the restrictions altogether, the NCAA level will also see a boost in its level of play due to more continuity amongst their rosters.

The second solution is for players to go overseas if they wish to forego the college route. Brandon Jennings chose to do this and it seems to have worked out for him. There is no telling whether going the college route would have done him any differently, but by going overseas he was able to get a contract right away and build a resume based on playing against players in a notable, albeit foreign, professional team. This avenue would allow players to earn money instead of “paying for free at college. The major downside to this is that many players from foreign countries and foreign leagues are very unpredictable as to how their particular style and play and skills will translate at the NBA level. It seems to be a 50/50 shot whether player will pan out or not.

The final solution would be to revert to the former system and eliminate the minimum college restriction. The NBA has seen many talented players take this avenue and become superstars; Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, and Lebron James just to name a few. However, the league has seen more busts or underwhelming players come to the league this way.  So again we are looking at the same dilemma as the foreign players, but in some regards worse; at least the foreign players know what it is like to go through the rigors of a professional schedule, whereas freshly graduated high schoolers may not be mature enough to handle what is waiting in just a few short months.

Really, all of these choices have their pros and cons, but hopefully after taking some time to think about it we can all agree that both levels of the game would benefit from change. Not only that, but the fans who pour so much time into watching be rewarded by the change as well.