Following potential 2013 draftees
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
I suppose a little. He still looks mediocre as hell to me and I would never want him in the 1st round, even with the 30th pick. Honestly, he reminds me of a shorter, less athletic Fat Al.
This one shows a little more of his overall skillset. I'm bringing him up because we have at least a possibility of packaging picks and assets to move up to the 4 - 5 range (with a little dreaming on my part). It may be as easy to snag Andrew Harrison as some of these other guys we're talking about .. and I'd say he'd be a bigger get than Jeff Teague or Eric Bledsoe..
I don't disagree at this point. Tbh, I was just flaunting the recruiting class.
orangello
Well-Known Member
I had the same thought that Al might be his best comp. I kinda threw up in my mouth.
Calipari is pushing a baseball-like rule. Straight out or 3 years..
I hate straight to the NBA, myself (hear me out). I've been in the gyms when it was straight out of HS and I've been there when it was one and done. The amount of sleaziness going on with the NBA in HS gyms was terrible. It's bad enough as it is with the show companies, AAU teams, etc .. but throw in the NBA scouts, NBA 'runners' and it gets 10x worse and much more distracting for very young kids.
Also, it's MUCH better for the NBA to have the kids go to college for at least one year. I bet the NBA has taken a nice spike in viewership since instituting the one and done rule. I wouldn't have ever started watching the NBA otherwise.
It's also much better on the budgets of NBA teams. Now they don't have to send scouts to random HS games and spread their resources more thin than being able to watch the kids at a college level and see more than one kid at a time, usually.
The NBA management actually wants a 2 year rule. Less expense, more maturity of the players/less risk, and higher viewership (college fans following).
As for the kids? I don't know .. I'm conflicted. I agree with Calipari that all Div1 athletes of income generating programs (I'll explain why 'income generating' if anyone wants to know) should get paid about $5,000 per year to take care of little things like their car breaking down, taking a girl on a date, etc.
So in summary, I'm open to about anything, Calipari is still going to recruit the best, no matter the rules, but I would hate to see the NBA back in HS gyms.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
That's a tough one and has surely been debated long and hard by the NBA. It would be better for fans, but not for the kids. Those with even the smallest amount of hype or upside (think CJ Miles) would come out wanting the guaranteed money. 90% would fall on their face and wash out of the league with no skills beyond that. At least one year of college gives them a taste of higher learning and improved social skills.
To be clear, it's not the GMs, coaches, assistants, or even scouts .. it's the agents and the people they (for example) 'hire' to get to the kids and get in their ears about signing with a firm. I wasn't calling the NBA personnel sleazy. They were always all class. It was the guys showing up at recess (no kidding) and at the Burger King parking lots on Friday nights. That doesn't happen at the college level .. but agents are the worst. Well .. and the show companies.
To add to this .. the colleges have a great system of insulation, great compliance departments, they educate the players what to watch for/watch out for .. the kids have a great support system. HS's have NONE of that and kids are lied to, hyped up, and too often ruined or ruin their chances..
The damn 'W' and 'E' is too close to one another on my keyboard. Weird that I did that twice in a roe.
orangello
Well-Known Member
It makes total sense.
The thing that bothers me are players like Wiggins (who is an extreme example) and others like Bazz. They seem to already have enough talent to be in the league so why make them wait?
Again, I understand the crap that you allow at the HS level if you do that. I just wanted to get my opinion out there.
I understand. It's perplexing, but I think it's better than the wholesale alternative. I also think of it like this analogy.
There are very bright HS students that would make a brilliant engineer, but lack the maturity and training to immediately be worth hiring by an engineering firm. It's not all bad that these kids go to school for a year, learn to play as a team (most never have), learn responsibility at a higher level, learn about the NBA 'game' (the best coaches help the kids with how to handle the finances, how to handle agents, etc), learn how to handle a brighter spot light, and gain a year of maturity .. not to mention honing their skills another year.
orangello
Well-Known Member
Great analogy, but you are missing the point. I am a fan of a team that is stuck in mediocrity. They won't trade all of their future assets or current players with potential for a superstar or someone close to it.
On the other side they won't give their players with potential all of the playing time that they need to be ready to make a serious impact by year 2 or year 3 of their NBA careers. They also won't deliberately tank in order to add top talent to their roster via the draft.
We are stuck in this ugly limbo thing and it is getting harder and harder to support.
If players had a chance to leave out of high school the team that I am a fan of might take a risk and be able to snatch someone that is a future superstar but they are underrated because they are coming out of high school.
I know there are a lot of holes in that theory but it is more realistic than the other scenarios that I outlined at the beginning of this rant.