Coach K thinks NCAA’s one-and-done policy is a ‘sham’
Per SI.com (via the Dan Patrick Show)…
“If [a kid is] good enough, he should be allowed to come right out of high school,” Kryzewski said.
But Coach K thinks if a player does go to college, he should take academics seriously.
“If they go to college, they should be there long enough to take core courses that could eventually lead to a degree,” Kryzewski said. “Otherwise it’s a sham.”
When the NBA age-limit rule was implemented, I conducted a study that found that players that were drafted straight out of high school had a higher success rate than players that were drafted out of college or via international ball.
I think the best system would be to allow high schoolers to be drafted, and if they go undrafted, they’re able to enter college. Once they do enter college, they’ll have to play a minimum of two years. That way, the players that are NBA-caliber at 18 can go straight to the league, while those that need seasoning will have to put in a couple of seasons on the collegiate level. The two-season minimum is to ensure that these players will put in some academic effort while in school (which will hopefully result in a degree somewhere down the line). One season isn’t enough. Right now, players have to pass just six hours in the first semester to be eligible to play for the entire year. That’s a joke.
Photo from fOTOGLIF
This does not necessarily apply to Coach K because he has been at Duke for so long, but what about coaches who bolt. Coach Cal goes to Kentucky and takes half of his recruits with him and current Kentucky players are sent to the curb. If coaches can jump to where the money is, why can’t players. I agree 2 years makes a whole lot more sense, but I am not sure there should be an age limit period. These days kids are picking colleges not based on academics, but on the coach. I think the coach has too much freedom and the students too much restrictions especially if they have to sit out for a year when they transfer. I believe it is save to say that the NCAA has a lot messed up regulations and the NBA one year of college initiative is not helping them out at all. One other thing John, I don’t think your an idiot like other people do, we all just have dumb ideas once in a while.
I’m the idiot. Please correct my save to “safe” and my your to “you’re”. This was my first post so I will get better at proofreading. My apologies to John and the Scoresreport.com staff.
I agree that coaches leaving players in a lurch is tough, but I think there needs to be some sort of penalty for changing schools. How about if a coach leaves a program, players can transfer to another school with no penalty? That way, the players aren’t punished when a coach decides to bolt, but the current rule would still be in place for regular transfers.
I think high schoolers should be able to go straight to the NBA, but if a guy enrolls in school, he’s required to wait two years before putting his name in the draft again.
I agree… make these kids stay in school for a minimum of two years… even up it to the point of saying they can’t enter the draft unless they have achieved an Associates Degree at a minimum… I’m all about letting them join the NBA before college, but if they go to school they should get something out of it!
Why is it that everything I read about this centers on the success rate of players when this rule–according to David Stern himself–was put in place to improve the success rate of NBA teams on draft day?
As far as I know, this really has nothing to do with whether players do well out of high school or whether they get an education or are mature enough to play in the NBA. It has more to do with the importance that a lottery pick positively impact an NBA team. If players are forced to spend a year in college, NBA teams get a better look at them and are less likely to waste a lottery pick on a bust like Kwame Brown.
You can sit here waste your breath trying to tell me whether or not this policy achieves the desired effect. I’m not saying it does. I’m just saying, this *is* the desired affect, not anything to do with the basketball player.
Weren’t you the one earlier who said why fix something that isn’t broken? HS players have a very high success rate relative to their collegiate peers, so Stern is trying to fix a non-existent problem.
In fact, it’s not about success rates at all. It’s about the maturity of the league. Stern wants these draft picks to make an immediate impact, when a good percentage of them won’t produce in their first year or two in the league. He wanted an age limit of 20, but negotiated down to 19. I’d be fine with 20, but 19 is wreaking havoc on the college game.
I did say that and, again, I’m not being ballsy and actually *taking a side* on this debate.
I’m just pointing out that the debate should not center around the success or education of players because that’s not what the rule is designed to improve. It’s meant to afford NBA teams an extended preview of a player’s skills and abilities so that they make better picks.
And I get your point about them making an immediate impact rather than having to incubate for their rookie year.
If you look at my post, you’ll see that I do mention the accuracy of the HS picks (they do very well in the NBA, historically speaking), but education and the negative impact on the college game is a by-product of Stern’s attempt at fixing a non-existent problem.
Paulsen, would you quit whining? My god, man.
I can’t click on your “study” because I’m at work, but my guess is that it centers around the SUCCESS RATE OF PLAYERS–which is not an issue–and that the sample of players coming straight out of high school is too small and non-random.
You need to get a new schtick, Ebola. If HS players are successful relative to college players, then why is Stern trying to get teams a longer look at them? He’s trying to fix a non-existent problem.
In other words, the success rate of HS players has everything to do with the discussion.