Durant Durant Rant

Until the Spencer Haywood legal ruling in 1970, the NBA did not accept undergraduates who left college early. (That's why Chamberlain had to play for the Globetrotters for a year after leaving Kansas early.) Even after the Haywood ruling, for several years non-seniors had to prove financial hardship before they could be drafted, so it was quite rare to have undergrads in the draft. Jordan didn't stay four years, but even then, leaving early was more the exception than the rule. Ewing and Mullin, for instance, stayed four years.

So this idea that players have always left early just isn't true.

 

But there are many who think they are good enough and can't hack it. Forcing them to go to college for at least one year might help make that clear to them. Then maybe, just maybe, they'll actually work toward a degree while getting better and NBA-ready.

 

You're right. It's only been true since 1970, which is why I'm stunned to see someone longing for the good old days before that decision. If every Oden and Durant stayed four years, that would be great for the power conferences but terrible with respect to mid-majors, where they almost always have kids who stay four years. So when someone says kids staying in college would be good for the game, that's true, depending on what teams you're talking about.

 

But it's not better for basketball fans. I'm a fan and that's the perspective I am looking at it from.

 

Brandon Rush and Charlie Villanueva are examples of this. Both were ready to go pro out of high school, and chose college at the last minute. I believe Villanueva ended up staying 2-3 years, while Rush is in his second year and is considering staying for a third.

No one would've thought that when they enrolled at school. And more education, even if it doesn't add up to a degree, doesn't hurt.

 

3 things many coming into NBA lack but that 3 - 4 years of college give them

A- ABILITY TO PASS
B- Play defense
C- Play as a Team ( see pass)

secondary to that is ability to play in the spotlight in big arena's and and on National tv.

Its s big adjustment to shooting backdrop of big arena.

 

Boom's right. It would be better for the overall quality of the college game. It might hurt the mid-majors, but that's a different issue.

 

It wouldn't be better for mid-major basketball fans, which is how one might look at it.

Power conferences would attract blue-chip athletes just the same, only now they would keep them four years, making it tougher for mid-majors to impact the sport the way they have this past decade. And I think even fans of teams that belong to power conference -- like say, me -- don't want that. I love the balance in the college game right now.

 

So you think the high number of underclassmen in the NBA draft is good because it helps the mid-majors?

 

I agree with those who say that leaving early hurts both the NCAA and NBA, but you guys are making the opposite side's argument too easy because of one thing: talking about the "old days." Because then they all can point to guys that came out 40 years ago. Just leave out comparisons to the past, and you're point remains: players would be more polished for the NBA by staying in school and college basketball would be bolstered by retaining their top players for 3 or 4 years. I don't think anyone could argue that. Just leave out the whole "back in the day" reason and just leave it at that.

At the same time I totally buy the thinking that if a kid is good enough and get paid millions there is no point in staying in school. I know I'd have left school early if SI offered me a job for huge bucks as a college sophomore. My point isn't that these kids should stay, it's just that if they did the college game would benefit. Obviously that's not going to happen, but in my perfect world they would.

 

It probably doesn't hurt. Take UConn with all its defections from last year -- it won't make the NCAA Tournament this season, which could open the door for a mid-major to take that spot.

The defections could also help mid-majors because big boys simply can't stash players for four years, meaning they have teams with less experience that are far more susceptible to first-round upsets. That's not to say upsets can't happen to experienced teams -- a KU team loaded with experience coming off two Final Four lost to Bucknell two years ago -- but it has to help those odds somewhat.

Yeah, the college game would be better if kids stayed four seasons. The NBA would not be, though, given that kids like Kobe, LeBron, KG, Dwight Howard and the like would have had to wait when they were already ready.

 

But what do you suppose the ratio is between underclassmen ready to suit up now and those who need more time? Barring a catastrophic injury, the top players would still be in the NBA. But what of the HS senior/college freshmen who never did anything in the league -- would it be better if the draft was dominated by more experienced players? I'd think so.