The NBA stops them from going to Europe, or another professional basketball league here in the States?
The NBA teams did make their own decision. They made the decision to impliment an age rule. It doesn't get done without the owners backing it. Stern works for them.
Do we tell 18 year old prodigy computer geniuses (or literally every single other possible occupation out there) that they have to leave the country in order to maximize their earning potential?
They can play here in the States. They can play in the D-League. Their age limit is 18. Is there a reason that's not based in hyperbole or emotion?
Has the league been made better because of the rule? Again, that's what this is about.
Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 02-27-2013 at 03:32 PM.
The only way I compared them is that they get paid in both, which is 100% true. You compared the amounts, after you denied they got paid.
Last edited by Since86; 02-27-2013 at 03:33 PM.
Which isn't at all what it said.
I didn't equate the two, I said cry me a river for trying to say it's unfair. I'm sorry that roughly $20,000 in tuition and another $8,000 per year in cash money isn't enough for some.
I won't be posting about this anymore in this thread, because it's supposed to be about IU basketball, but goodness. I don't see how anyone can think those high school players who would be drafted, aren't getting a raw deal.
Nope, but I'd except it. As the saying goes, "Beggars can't be choosers." You're getting an opportunity that's better than 99.9% of the population. I'd be happy with that. You're given prime rib and you complain because it's not filet mignon.
I don't care to argue about whether or not it's fair. I'm not going to change your opinion. I just think it's absurd to try and say that the NBA stops them from getting paid, when they have a number of different options, if they want money.
I don't think it's fair that LeBron makes $40 million a year, or whatever it is after endorsements, while policemen get paid crap. Sorry that they think they're worth more, but in the grand scheme of things, it's about 10,000,000th on the priority list of *****ing about fairness.
I realize that this is totally not quantifiable, but also some highly touted high school phenoms who seemed like can't-misses did miss, and never amounted to anything. They went to the NBA long before their minds or their body was ready for it, and were absolutely ruined and out of the league not long after. I'm thinking of guys like Darius Miles, hyped as maybe the best high school prospect EVER.
Of course it's unknowable if Miles or other uber-talented 18-year-olds would have had steller NBA careers if they had waited to enter the league until they were 21, but if so, it explains how both leagues are hurt by this. For every Lebron, Kobe, or Amare I'd think there are 5 guys like Miles, Bender, Ebi, Telfair, Livingston, Kwame, James Lang, etc.
I wish there were two options: 1) direct to NBA out of HS; 2) stay in college at least 3 years
Maybe option 1 would require approval by a panel of GMs, coaches, and players.
Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 02-27-2013 at 05:36 PM.
The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)
Penn State about to help you guys out
If MSU loses on the road at Michigan and then wins at home against Wisconsin, every contender but IU would have five losses in the Big Ten. Meaning, if IU would then win the next 2 at home (Iowa, OSU) then the UM game would not matter with respect to an outright conference title.
Expecting IU to go undefeated is a little much but there seems to be a common thread in the games they've lost or ones that have gotten too close for comfort.... Depth. I don't think IU is as deep as we thought they were going to be. The style of ball they are playing requires the bench to significantly contribute or else the starters to do more. Watford is inconsistent. Sheehey hasn't been consistent off the bench (he's lost that '6th starter vibe'). Hulls lacks quickness yet IU doesn't have anyone to really bring in for him that brings anything close to a rounded game and/or changeup to Hulls). Abell doesn't seem to have progressed like expected. I think Zeller has now been well scouted more than anything plus it doesn't seem it's in IU's DNA to force it into Zeller early and often anyway (and he's not really built for a physical game yet either).
You've got Elston off the bench... Hollowell hasn't really been that impressive. Have the two kids that were suspended by the NCAA fallen off the edge of the earth? For all the talk about the depth they were going to bring it's looking like it isn't this year.
I think depth is really their Achilles heel... especially when coupled with the swarming defense and speed of their game. They can be worn down with a physical, methodical approach if you can stay within shouting distance and weather the initial storm. Once worn down the defense weakens and perhaps more importantly, the offense loses its legs and efficiency. IU's half court offense can really bog down late.
If Sheehey is 'on' it helps... and if Watford has his game going it helps tremendously. But it's past the point that we can count on that.
So... am I wrong?
Last edited by Bball; 02-28-2013 at 04:09 PM.
Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.
"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."
I think you're mostly on target. The assertion that Cody is not really built for a physical game yet is one I have shared in the past, but then the Purdue and MSU games happened. Facing PU and a guy who played great the first time around, and then facing MSU and the biggest lineup in the conference. In those games, every inside move had a purpose and had a finish. Especially vs. MSU, every previous soft attempt by Cody seemed to suddenly be a thunderous dunk, often off the offensive glass.
Then vs. Minny his game went back to passive again. I'm wondering if getting a foul in the first couple of minutes just destroys his aggressiveness when the other guy also gets it going.
#1, Kwame Brown, 0 all-star games
#2, Tyson's Chicken, 1 all-star game (12th season)
#4, Eddy Curry, 0 all-star games
#8, DeSagana Diop, 93 career starts
Yep, the good old days when the NBA was booming because of allowing HS kids to go straight to the draft.
The only valid argument for this is that if a kid could actually step in and contribute to an NBA team right away, it might be wrong to deny him this opportunity. But it sure isn't a "right".
Otherwise, the flood of guys with potential but no actual game was absolutely hurting the NBA, colleges, the CBA (was it already gone by then?), the D-League, Euroleagues, etc.
There's no better example than Bracey Wright, who would have been a high lottery pick in HS, maybe a mid-first rounder after his freshman year at IU, late first-rounder (but guaranteed money) after his sophomore year, and played himself into the mid-second round by his junior year, and for all of his hype played a total of 26 games in his NBA career.
He absolutely made the NBA a better league by waiting until he'd proven how low his ceiling really was than by coming in and failing to hit his potential.
The same would've happened to Jon Bender had he gone to college and proven that he wasn't the same player among college boys and certainly wouldn't be able to compete with the NBA's men.
Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
This is great.