MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Pakuni on October 18, 2018, 11:13:08 AM
-
This, way more than the trial going on in New York, is likely to significantly change college basketball.
In a move that could challenge the NCAA's monopoly on elite talent, the NBA's G League is creating a new venture as an alternative to the one-and-done route for the best American basketball prospects, league president Malcolm Turner told ESPN.
As part of a newly formed "professional path" starting in the summer of 2019, the G League will offer "Select Contracts" worth $125,000 to elite prospects who are at least 18 years old but not yet eligible for the NBA draft. It will target recent or would-be high school graduates who otherwise would have likely spent just one season playing college basketball, enticing them not only with a six-figure salary but also the opportunity to benefit from NBA infrastructure, as well as a bevy of off-court development programs "geared towards facilitating and accelerating their transition to the pro game," Turner said.
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25015812/g-league-offer-professional-path-elite-prospects-not-wanting-go-one-done-route-ncaa
-
Adrian Wojnarowski @wojespn
I have doubts about how many top players will go this route. Some, yes. But G-League is full of early connecting flights, long bus rides, small gyms. It isn't glamorous. Big-time NCAA ball still has the trappings of exposure, packed houses, private jets. You'll get paid there too
-
This'll be interesting. 125k is a lot of money, glamorous lifestyle or not. I'm curious if NBA scouts are going to attend HS games and look for guys or are they going to stick to the USA basketball and Mcdonalds AA guys or what method they'll use to determine top high school players.
-
If kids go, that just cuts into the blue blue ods landing these players year after year. But it also increases the focus and competition in the next tier by the blue bloods making it harder for non blue bloods to close the deal on some of these players. Will be interestIng to see what happens.....
-
Adrian Wojnarowski @wojespn
I have doubts about how many top players will go this route. Some, yes. But G-League is full of early connecting flights, long bus rides, small gyms. It isn't glamorous. Big-time NCAA ball still has the trappings of exposure, packed houses, private jets. You'll get paid there too
I think he's underrating the allure of $125K going directly to the kid above board and without the threat of an NCAA investigation, the immediate ability to sign a sponsorship deal and profit from one's likeness, and avoiding the charade (for many) of attending classes for a few months.
He's also overrated the glamour of college basketball.
Will every top kid do this? Of course not. But I suspect we'll eventually see at least half of the top 20 choose this route within 2-3 years.
-
This'll be interesting. 125k is a lot of money, glamorous lifestyle or not. I'm curious if NBA scouts are going to attend HS games and look for guys or are they going to stick to the USA basketball and Mcdonalds AA guys or what method they'll use to determine top high school players.
It's not just the $125K. It's the ability to earn millions more immediately through shoe deals and other sponsorships. Does anyone doubt Nike, addidas, Under Armour or Puma wouldn't be eager to sign up a Zion Williamson or RJ Barrett out of high school?
-
Excellent idea
-
It's not just the $125K. It's the ability to earn millions more immediately through shoe deals and other sponsorships. Does anyone doubt Nike, addidas, Under Armour or Puma wouldn't be eager to sign up a Zion Williamson or RJ Barrett out of high school?
Honestly I don't know. Is there any precedent for AHL or AAA players getting signed with brands?
-
I think he's underrating the allure of $125K going directly to the kid above board and without the threat of an NCAA investigation, the immediate ability to sign a sponsorship deal and profit from one's likeness, and avoiding the charade (for many) of attending classes for a few months.
He's also overrated the glamour of college basketball.
Will every top kid do this? Of course not. But I suspect we'll eventually see at least half of the top 20 choose this route within 2-3 years.
I'm not sure about half, but I do think we will see a handful.
-
Honestly I don't know. Is there any precedent for AHL or AAA players getting signed with brands?
You're way overvaluing the MLB & NHL. For individual stars, NO ONE except UEFA touches the NBA. My mother in law can name 10+ non-Bulls players, she probably can't name more than 2 non Hawks or Cubs / Sox. And thanks to hype videos NBA stars start becoming stars in HS. Heck ESPN launched an entire OTT platform on the backs of Zion & RJ.
There's no doubt in my mind the Top 5 NCAA prospects would easy draw $1 Million as a nice down payment on a future shoe deal. Plus the G League will probbaly be much easier to work with in terms of using highlights, teammarks, etc. The social media videos will be through the roof.
-
1. Great idea. LaVar Ball already came up with it, I wonder if he will demand royalties. I’m sure the G League, with its connection to the NBA, will attract more HS players than the JBA.
2. I thought the NBA was going to end 1-and-done by allowing player to again be eligible for the draft right out of HS.
-
Honestly I don't know. Is there any precedent for AHL or AAA players getting signed with brands?
I'm not sure that's an apt comparison, given that guys who spend much time AAA and the AHL rarely are seen as future stars. Guys at those levels typically are 3-4 years post-draft by then.
A better comparison might be someone like Bryce Harper, who signed a big contract with Under Armour before he played any pro baseball, or Sidney Crosby and Connor McDavid, both of whom signed endorsement deals before they were drafted into the NHL.
-
It's not just the $125K. It's the ability to earn millions more immediately through shoe deals and other sponsorships. Does anyone doubt Nike, addidas, Under Armour or Puma wouldn't be eager to sign up a Zion Williamson or RJ Barrett out of high school?
Does it work that well for MLB minor league ball players?
-
Does it work that well for MLB minor league ball players?
The future stars, sure.
Bryce Harper (see above) had a deal with Under Armour before he made his first MLB appearance.
Vlad Guerrero Jr. has a deal with Under Armour.
-
I think he's underrating the allure of $125K going directly to the kid above board and without the threat of an NCAA investigation, the immediate ability to sign a sponsorship deal and profit from one's likeness, and avoiding the charade (for many) of attending classes for a few months.
He's also overrated the glamour of college basketball.
Will every top kid do this? Of course not. But I suspect we'll eventually see at least half of the top 20 choose this route within 2-3 years.
I’m going to sound like a pompous d-bag here, but the last two years, I got to spend time at both Duke and Kansas and see things behind the scenes. I’ll say this, if I’m a top tier kid that falls into this realm, I’m going to a blueblood (with an insurance policy in my back pocket).
I’ll reach out to Malik Newman and see if he had this option, what he would have done.
-
I’m going to sound like a pompous d-bag here, but the last two years, I got to spend time at both Duke and Kansas and see things behind the scenes. I’ll say this, if I’m a top tier kid that falls into this realm, I’m going to a blueblood (with an insurance policy in my back pocket).
I’ll reach out to Malik Newman and see if he had this option, what he would have done.
And yet kids who are at best fringe draft candidates (like Newman, Rawle Alkins, Cliff Alexander, the Harrisons, Isaiah Briscoe, etc.) leave bluebloods early every year.
-
I hope they will also have the HS kids taking online college classes. MLS has their direct from HS kids taking college classes, usually through SNHU.
-
I think it is an excellent idea. Interesting to see how it shakes out.
My instincts are that such an option would actually, on average, be deleterious to a players long-term earning potential.
It does though, take away any argument act the NCAA should be paying players, if they want to be paid there is a G-league option. If they prefer the value of the exposure and perks of the NCAA, they can choose a free education. That's called the free market.
-
I think that this is an interesting potential development. Several thoughts:
- It'll be fairly short lived until they completely abandon the one-and-done rule.
- For the truly elite players, if they choose to do this, the $125k will be less of a factor than the endorsement money.
- Clearly some elite players will take this option, but I wouldn't count on it being a majority.
- I also think that most top players would still opt for the NCAA and top programs. Life as a super-star athlete on a college campus for one semester of classes is not a bad gig.
- I wonder how many of these they will allow, and how the players union will feel about it.
-
https://twitter.com/evandaniels/status/1052976405674414080?s=21
https://twitter.com/bsnow247/status/1052960925051957249?s=21
I think options are good but as is mentioned in the tweet..... .there is great value in not playing against grown men in the G league and getting exposed.
Should be interesting to follow.
-
So are these players drafted in the NBA draft but only allowed to play in the G League for their first year or...?
If I'm an NBA team, do I really want to pay a kid $125K, develop him, and then see a different team draft him the next draft?
-
To clarify why I think it will cost them in long-term earning potential. The huge benefit of going to a blue-blood is exposure and generation of brand.
That is where the value is for the endorsement deals, is investing in an established brand. The G-league is never going to generate that exposure and brand-building opportunities. Instead it is more likely that the big apparel companies hold off on major endorsements deals, because essentially they are betting on the player making it big, with little exposure or benefit in the short-intermediate term.
Look at HE as an example. If he had gone this route, he would have never gotten drafted in the lottery and turned it into a big first contract. He would have been paid $125k, gotten likely little or no endorsement money, and turned it into a career in the G-league making likely near the minimum for the remainder of his career.
-
To clarify why I think it will cost them in long-term earning potential. The huge benefit of going to a blue-blood is exposure and generation of brand.
That is where the value is for the endorsement deals, is investing in an established brand. The G-league is never going to generate that exposure and brand-building opportunities. Instead it is more likely that the big apparel companies hold off on major endorsements deals, because essentially they are betting on the player making it big, with little exposure or benefit in the short-intermediate term.
Look at HE as an example. If he had gone this route, he would have never gotten drafted in the lottery and turned it into a big first contract. He would have been paid $125k, gotten likely little or no endorsement money, and turned it into a career in the G-league making likely near the minimum for the remainder of his career.
Much like teams don't draft based on college production, I don't think teams would be drafting kids based on their G League production (unless they're like 25 year old G League rookies).
I don't think Hank's career or earnings would've been any different really had he went this route. He was a big 19 year old who could handle the ball, rebound the ball, and looked like he might be able to stretch the floor with a perimeter shot at some point in his career. He was drafted based on his potential, not on leading MU to a missed postseason.
-
Honestly I don't know. Is there any precedent for AHL or AAA players getting signed with brands?
Umm is anyone paying attention???!!!! Adidas gives these studs 100k for their allegiance and to go to school X. You think all of a sudden because they are in the G league the shoe companies will lose interest??
Duh!!??
-
So are these players drafted in the NBA draft but only allowed to play in the G League for their first year or...?
If I'm an NBA team, do I really want to pay a kid $125K, develop him, and then see a different team draft him the next draft?
No...these are players who would be playing for G league teams but who haven't been drafted yet because they are too young is my understanding. Not sure exactly how the process works. Do they have to go through a G league draft or can they be signed as free agents so to speak?
NBA trying to find an alternative to having to draft guys right out of high school......who,in most cases aren't ready... ...still think the NBA will eventually allow kids to enter draft out of high school again but they haven't yet.
-
1. Great idea. LaVar Ball already came up with it, I wonder if he will demand royalties. I’m sure the G League, with its connection to the NBA, will attract more HS players than the JBA.
2. I thought the NBA was going to end 1-and-done by allowing player to again be eligible for the draft right out of HS.
I thought the same, sort of makes this new initiative somewhat obscure. Have to wait and see.
-
To clarify why I think it will cost them in long-term earning potential. The huge benefit of going to a blue-blood is exposure and generation of brand.
That is where the value is for the endorsement deals, is investing in an established brand. The G-league is never going to generate that exposure and brand-building opportunities. Instead it is more likely that the big apparel companies hold off on major endorsements deals, because essentially they are betting on the player making it big, with little exposure or benefit in the short-intermediate term.
20-25 years ago this would be a great point. But I think not so much today. Between YouTube, social media, numerous websites hyping high school kids, hundreds of fan message boards talking about prospects, ESPN and other networks showing high school games, etc., the top kids already are known quantities among sports fans long before they ever step foot on a college court.
Zion Williamson has 150K+ Twitter followers. RJ Barrett has more than 35K. These kids don't need Duke to establish their brand. They're establishing their own brand before stepping on campus, and will likely be able to do so even more extensively without fear or violating "amateurism" rules.
And I think you may be underestimating the power of the NBA hype machine. You don't think ESPN and the NBA's other partners will be showing Windy City Bulls highlights of these kids?
Look at HE as an example. If he had gone this route, he would have never gotten drafted in the lottery and turned it into a big first contract. He would have been paid $125k, gotten likely little or no endorsement money, and turned it into a career in the G-league making likely near the minimum for the remainder of his career.
Henry wasn't drafted in the lottery and I fail to see how one year of the G-League would have ruined his chances of getting drafted vs one year at Marquette.
-
I thought the same, sort of makes this new initiative somewhat obscure. Have to wait and see.
As part of this, the NBA is leaving one-and-done in place until at least 2022.
-
As part of this, the NBA is leaving one-and-done in place until at least 2022.
OK, there you go. Gives the 125K initiative a three year trial period.
-
Total attendance for G League games during the 2017-18 season was 1.6 million. With 27 teams and a 50-game schedule, that's an average attendance of less than 2,400 fans per game.
Total attendance for NCAA Division I basketball games during the 2017-18 regular season was 24.5 million. With 351 teams and a total of 5,324 home games (not including the NCAA tournament), that's an average attendance of 4,607 fans per game.
Only 41 G League games (out of 675 total home games, or about 6%) were broadcast nationally. By comparison, around 1,000 regular season Division I basketball games are broadcast nationally each year.
The G League may offer players money. But it doesn't come close to matching the exposure of NCAA Division I basketball -- especially at the major conference level. The difference is magnified even further during the NCAA tournament. Total viewership during March Madness (from the First Four to the Final Four) was more than 97 million.
https://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league-sets-records-across-board-historic-17th-season/ (https://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league-sets-records-across-board-historic-17th-season/)
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2019/Attendance.pdf (http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2019/Attendance.pdf)
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2015/03/college-basketball-ratings-viewership-every-game-2014-2015-regular-season-espn-cbs-fox-fs1-nbcsn/ (http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2015/03/college-basketball-ratings-viewership-every-game-2014-2015-regular-season-espn-cbs-fox-fs1-nbcsn/)
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-04-13/2018-ncaa-tournament-and-final-four-viewership-attendance (https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-04-13/2018-ncaa-tournament-and-final-four-viewership-attendance)
-
Without that kind of exposure, there's no way Donte Divincenzo becomes the 17th overall pick of the 2018 NBA Draft.
-
Then again, he might not be the type of player the G League would be reaching out to. I'll be interested to see how this works.
-
Without that kind of exposure, there's no way Donte Divincenzo becomes the 17th overall pick of the 2018 NBA Draft.
But Donte Divincenzo, as the 124th rated prospect in his class, wouldn't be a target for the G-League anyway.
-
But Donte Divincenzo, as the 124th rated prospect in his class, wouldn't be a target for the G-League anyway.
Exactly. I don't think the additional exposure the NCAA can provide will make much of a difference to the pool of players this proposal is targeting.
One thing that would make this proposal better is if players taking the G-league route were eligible for the draft right away. Teams could draft these guys and send them to their affiliate. That way, teams would have an extreme interest in getting them to develop the most during their one G-league year.
-
Honestly I don't know. Is there any precedent for AHL or AAA players getting signed with brands?
Does it work that well for MLB minor league ball players?
The casual fan doesn't pay attention to the NHL or MLB drafts. Of the top 10 picks in the 2017 NHL draft, 3 are currently on NHL rosters. The stud prospects are usually given more time to develop in the minors or Europe.
MLB is even less. Even the studs like Harper and Vlad Guerrero Jr spend a few years in the minors.
As for the NBA, the top couple recruiting prospects are household names for basketball fans and almost all of those top 10 picks are right into the league and marketing begins. If you're talking a kid who is a top 10 pick in next years draft, you absolutely start marketing him as a sports related brand if possible.
-
Outstanding players who simply do not want to go to college (Brandon Jennings) and outstanding players who cannot make the grade to get into college would benefit from this, especially if they didn't want to go to Europe as Jennings did.
If the 1-and-done rule is eliminated, however, it would be interesting to see how this would work.
-
Outstanding players who simply do not want to go to college (Brandon Jennings) and outstanding players who cannot make the grade to get into college would benefit from this, especially if they didn't want to go to Europe as Jennings did.
If the 1-and-done rule is eliminated, however, it would be interesting to see how this would work.
Suspect that this is just a bridge to 2022 when the NBA lowers its draft age limit.
-
Without that kind of exposure, there's no way Donte Divincenzo becomes the 17th overall pick of the 2018 NBA Draft.
Are you saying that Divincenzo was the 17th pick because a lot of basketball fans saw him on TV and in arenas?
That's wholly irrelevant.
How many fans saw Luka Doncic in person or on TV? How many saw Frank Ntilikina or Kristaps Porzingis or Emmanuel Mudiay or Giannis Antetokounmpo?
NBA scouts are going to find players wherever they are. They're sure as heck going to find them in an NBA-owned league.
-
20-25 years ago this would be a great point. But I think not so much today. Between YouTube, social media, numerous websites hyping high school kids, hundreds of fan message boards talking about prospects, ESPN and other networks showing high school games, etc., the top kids already are known quantities among sports fans long before they ever step foot on a college court.
Zion Williamson has 150K+ Twitter followers. RJ Barrett has more than 35K. These kids don't need Duke to establish their brand. They're establishing their own brand before stepping on campus, and will likely be able to do so even more extensively without fear or violating "amateurism" rules.
And I think you may be underestimating the power of the NBA hype machine. You don't think ESPN and the NBA's other partners will be showing Windy City Bulls highlights of these kids?
Henry wasn't drafted in the lottery and I fail to see how one year of the G-League would have ruined his chances of getting drafted vs one year at Marquette.
You very likely may be right. But the thing is, part of the hype machine, and twitter followers is based on the fact that the players may go to my favorite Blue Blood.
When they go the the Windy City Bulls, that no one gives a damn about, they vanish into a bit of obscurity. Showing highlights of the Windy City Bulls isn't going to bring eyeballs to ESPN, but Big State School X, or Blue-Blood Y that has a legion of fans will.
They then have to play against grown men, who are fighting for a job in the NBA. Players like HE would be exposed. The idea of potential goes away considerably, when they can't guard (or score against) a second string G-league player. The incentive on drafting them top develop them goes away. HE is not a first round draft pick if based on G-league production.
Now, if you are dominating the G-league, that may be a different story. Maybe you get some hype from ESPN, but on average, even top 20 players may not be ready to dominate in the G-league. ESPN will rather focus on the NCAA, where there is a dedicated fan base, that really doesn't care if a G-league player is better than their star. They want to see their star on the highlights, and ESPN will always cater to the audience.
-
Are you saying that Divincenzo was the 17th pick because a lot of basketball fans saw him on TV and in arenas?
Not saying that. Divincenzo performed at his absolute best on the biggest stage. It's true that NBA scouts find great talent around the world. But the exposure of the NCAA tournament can help players gain attention across the league they might not otherwise have gotten.
-
Another example that comes to mind is Derrick Williams of Arizona in 2011. Even before the tournament, he was already recognized as a great player (Pac-10 Player of the Year, 2nd team AP All-American). But Williams took his game to another level in March. After scoring 32 points against Duke, his draft stock skyrocketed and he ended up being the 2nd overall pick.
-
And yet kids who are at best fringe draft candidates (like Newman, Rawle Alkins, Cliff Alexander, the Harrisons, Isaiah Briscoe, etc.) leave bluebloods early every year.
You're right on, no argument here. I think it really comes down to the kid and his situation, the advice he's getting, and the pros/cons of college vs the G-League.
I say this as a 40 year old guy with a job, but Kansas's travel was premium first class. Their set up in Lawrence is out of this world nice. The school work is obviously the burden for someone, if you're going to Kansas/Duke, you clearly have NBA aspirations. At some point, and in this scenario it's going to have to be early, one will have to weigh the impact of playing against older guys, some who have been in the league, all trying to get to the league, versus the college developmental experience and all that comes with it. Does the allure of the $125k make a bigger difference and grinding it out in Sioux Falls against a guy who's been up/down in the league seem appealing? Money is money, and $1 today versus $1 a year from now is always worth more, I totally get it.
I think it's a specific player type that would take this, Mudiay pops up in my mind. I think a kid would have to really self scout themselves, and weigh the options here in this proposal. The elephant in the room is that the shoe companies have every incentive to still get these kids to college (into a school with their brand).
-
You're right on, no argument here. I think it really comes down to the kid and his situation, the advice he's getting, and the pros/cons of college vs the G-League.
Completely agree it's going to be a case-by-case situation. Some top-rated prospects - the aforementioned Willamson, for example, or maybe an Andre Drummond, would not be stunted by developing in the G.
On the other hand, a kid like Jon Scheyer or Justin Jackson would get murdered down there.
-
20-25 years ago this would be a great point. But I think not so much today. Between YouTube, social media, numerous websites hyping high school kids, hundreds of fan message boards talking about prospects, ESPN and other networks showing high school games, etc., the top kids already are known quantities among sports fans long before they ever step foot on a college court.
Zion Williamson has 150K+ Twitter followers. RJ Barrett has more than 35K. These kids don't need Duke to establish their brand. They're establishing their own brand before stepping on campus, and will likely be able to do so even more extensively without fear or violating "amateurism" rules.
And I think you may be underestimating the power of the NBA hype machine. You don't think ESPN and the NBA's other partners will be showing Windy City Bulls highlights of these kids?
Henry wasn't drafted in the lottery and I fail to see how one year of the G-League would have ruined his chances of getting drafted vs one year at Marquette.
Not an apples to apples comparison, but Darius Bazely, 5-star SF who decided to go to the G-League this season has less than 5K twitter followers. Now, he doesn't have the transcendent talent that Barrett and Williamson do, but I think it's fair to say that Duke helped those two in the follower department.
I also now feel silly for looking up how many twitter followers some 17 year olds have.
-
I think there's a lot of intended and unintended consequences with this idea as well.
You could wind up with the G League as a competitive recruiter against your school. I don't know if they would actively recruit, their criteria for who the "select" players would be to get these contract offers is still a little unclear. Either way, they'll be passively always recruiting against whoever those select players are going to be. It's a really interesting dynamic.
The biggest benefit to the NBA and teams is getting as much data (physical/mental/emotional) on a kid as early as possible. The how/where players are assigned would really be very interesting. For hypothetical purposes, we'll use Collin Sexton as an example. As a potential lottery pick, whichever G League team gets him would know everything about his makeup for a season. Let's say Sexton plays great in the G League, and the NBA team who's affiliate he played for, then passes on him in the 7th spot of the lottery. Logically, other NBA teams would probably react as "WTF, Cleveland had him in the G League, and is passing on him now?". His stock (one would think) would plummet. Obviously other teams would do their due diligence, but the greater point being, the information collected by the NBA franchise would be of tremendous value.
I'm sure I'm missing some other obvious questions, but this will be interesting to say the least.
-
To clarify why I think it will cost them in long-term earning potential. The huge benefit of going to a blue-blood is exposure and generation of brand.
That is where the value is for the endorsement deals, is investing in an established brand.
This is exactly right. It isn't just about these guys wearing shoe brands as pros, it's about marketing the school as well. Nike wants Duke to thrive, Adidas wants Kansas to thrive, Under Armour wants Maryland to thrive because that's great brand exposure to huge fanbases. None of those shoe companies give a rat's ass about the Fort Wayne Mad Ants.
My guess is most of these guys will continue to go the college route because that's where the money is and that's where you can viably start to build a brand. The most likely change is this will lead to open payment of players in college basketball.
-
I thought the same, sort of makes this new initiative somewhat obscure. Have to wait and see.
The one and done thing isn't for like 4 years. This will be immediate next year.
-
Total attendance for G League games during the 2017-18 season was 1.6 million. With 27 teams and a 50-game schedule, that's an average attendance of less than 2,400 fans per game.
Total attendance for NCAA Division I basketball games during the 2017-18 regular season was 24.5 million. With 351 teams and a total of 5,324 home games (not including the NCAA tournament), that's an average attendance of 4,607 fans per game.
Only 41 G League games (out of 675 total home games, or about 6%) were broadcast nationally. By comparison, around 1,000 regular season Division I basketball games are broadcast nationally each year.
The G League may offer players money. But it doesn't come close to matching the exposure of NCAA Division I basketball -- especially at the major conference level. The difference is magnified even further during the NCAA tournament. Total viewership during March Madness (from the First Four to the Final Four) was more than 97 million.
https://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league-sets-records-across-board-historic-17th-season/ (https://gleague.nba.com/news/nba-g-league-sets-records-across-board-historic-17th-season/)
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2019/Attendance.pdf (http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2019/Attendance.pdf)
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2015/03/college-basketball-ratings-viewership-every-game-2014-2015-regular-season-espn-cbs-fox-fs1-nbcsn/ (http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2015/03/college-basketball-ratings-viewership-every-game-2014-2015-regular-season-espn-cbs-fox-fs1-nbcsn/)
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-04-13/2018-ncaa-tournament-and-final-four-viewership-attendance (https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-04-13/2018-ncaa-tournament-and-final-four-viewership-attendance)
That is in the past though. If you shift the top 10 prospects from college to the G-League the numbers will change a little. The NBA also introduced 2-ways last years (where the rules need a little tweaking) and there is potential for expanding rosters to have a true minor league system (Aka more long-term control of players).
The real fundamental shift will be if they do steal away the top prospects, college is no longer a breeding ground for future stars. In the past, guys like Wade who you routed for in college became the next generation of NBA stars. If this strategy works, fans like me will stop watching college basketball. Only the Alumni pissing contest fans will be entertained when the talent is so watered down without the high-end talent.
-
That is in the past though. If you shift the top 10 prospects from college to the G-League the numbers will change a little.
I doubt it. A few junkies will tune in, but the college following comes from years of fan loyalty. It'll take a long time, decades if ever, before anyone cares about the G League.
For comparison, look at the baseball minors. How many people tuned in for Bryce Harper or Kris Bryant when they were in the minors?
-
I think the problem is that the biggest risk will be on the HS kid. For the NBA team a $125k rental is pennies of an investment for a potential diamond while the kid might miss on a couple of millions if he doesn't deliver as expected in G-League and I don't think endorsements will bring big bucks at G-League level and I sure as hell hope the NBA team includes insurance for them (I have not read so maybe yes?) in case of career ending injury.
-
Good, if these guys don't want to play college ball, there are alternatives. Have at it. You want to play ball, get recognized and earn a degree, college sports is a great option, too.
-
I doubt it. A few junkies will tune in, but the college following comes from years of fan loyalty. It'll take a long time, decades if ever, before anyone cares about the G League.
For comparison, look at the baseball minors. How many people tuned in for Bryce Harper or Kris Bryant when they were in the minors?
For comparison, how many people watch college baseball? Maybe it's mutual destructive but in the end more people just watch NBA instead of watered down college?
-
Players already have the option of playing overseas straight out of high school. For NBA lottery prospects, chances are they'll earn far more than $175,000 a year. Brandon Jennings, Emmanuel Mudiay, Terrence Ferguson and others have gone this route. Not sure how much this will really impact college basketball.
-
Players already have the option of playing overseas straight out of high school. For NBA lottery prospects, chances are they'll earn far more than $175,000 a year. Brandon Jennings, Emmanuel Mudiay, Terrence Ferguson and others have gone this route. Not sure how much this will really impact college basketball.
Yea but you have kids who have never left the country or come from varied backgrounds, and you’re asking them to move to a diff country and a diff language and a diff culture at 18. It’s potentially very overwhelming.
This alternative keeps you in the US and in an NBA affiliated league. Makes sense for a lot of kids
-
G League teams average about 2400 in attendance. That's their main revenue stream... Say a team hooks up with a shoe company and gets a bit of "sponsorship" some of which goes to the players... Say a team in order to get more eyeballs recruits the top 3-5 local high school prospects each year. Suddenly they are getting 4000+ in attendance because local people want to see the local kids. Then the shoe money goes up and the players get a little more.... and the G league gets more attractive to play in and more attractive to watch. It's still a niche - but a bigger niche. They get more viewers online and that increases the attractiveness further to advertisers...
I'll be the first to admit I watch my favorite MU and other CBB players in the G league, and if I lived near a team I'd go to a game and I'd take the family - especially if there was local interest.
If Milwaukee's G league team had Vander and Hank and Jamil and Deonte (local H.S. guys) I would be very keen to watch... much more than a bunch of random "almost good enough" guys.
-
Players already have the option of playing overseas straight out of high school. For NBA lottery prospects, chances are they'll earn far more than $175,000 a year. Brandon Jennings, Emmanuel Mudiay, Terrence Ferguson and others have gone this route. Not sure how much this will really impact college basketball.
But maybe some of these kids didn't really want to go overseas. Maybe if they had a $125K alternative, they would have stayed here.
I do agree with your last line. There will be minimal effect on college hoops IMHO. Maybe even zero.
-
https://twitter.com/EvanDaniels/status/1052976405674414080
@EvanDaniels
Following Following @EvanDaniels
More
Asked a NBA agent if he would ever advise a prospect to skip college for a year in the G League. Response: "Never."
12:35 PM - 18 Oct 2018
-
https://twitter.com/EvanDaniels/status/1052976405674414080
@EvanDaniels
Following Following @EvanDaniels
More
Asked a NBA agent if he would ever advise a prospect to skip college for a year in the G League. Response: "Never."
12:35 PM - 18 Oct 2018
I agree with this analysis.
-
And a whole different side to the story:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/wnba-players-call-out-new-g-league-contracts-and-they-have-a-point/ar-BBOBkyQ?li=BBnba9I (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/wnba-players-call-out-new-g-league-contracts-and-they-have-a-point/ar-BBOBkyQ?li=BBnba9I)
-
And a whole different side to the story:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/wnba-players-call-out-new-g-league-contracts-and-they-have-a-point/ar-BBOBkyQ?li=BBnba9I (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/wnba-players-call-out-new-g-league-contracts-and-they-have-a-point/ar-BBOBkyQ?li=BBnba9I)
When the wnba isn't completely subsidized by their partner nba teams, when people actually show up to the games, and when people actually care about their product they can have an argument. Until then they are still making a decent living relative to others.
And I really chuckled about the tweets saying the girls could hang with g leaguers. No.
-
When the wnba isn't completely subsidized by their partner nba teams, when people actually show up to the games, and when people actually care about their product they can have an argument. Until then they are still making a decent living relative to others.
And I really chuckled about the tweets saying the girls could hang with g leaguers. No.
To be fair everything you just said is true about the GLeague to. The 20-30% of revenue they make vs 50% for men's isn't good
-
To be fair everything you just said is true about the GLeague to. The 20-30% of revenue they make vs 50% for men's isn't good
And to be fair, the WNBA is more popular than the G-League if you go be attendance figures.
WNBA 2017 average attendance: 7,716
G-League 2017-18 average attendance: about 1,500.
-
To be fair everything you just said is true about the GLeague to. The 20-30% of revenue they make vs 50% for men's isn't good
But the G League is just a minor league for the NBA. Were talking about players who the NBA thinks are going to be top of the draft class type players. In reality were more talking about the nba then the actual statistics of the Gleague.
-
But the G League is just a minor league for the NBA. Were talking about players who the NBA thinks are going to be top of the draft class type players. In reality were more talking about the nba then the actual statistics of the Gleague.
That doesn't quite address the 20-30% vs 50% revenue share
-
But the G League is just a minor league for the NBA. Were talking about players who the NBA thinks are going to be top of the draft class type players. In reality were more talking about the nba then the actual statistics of the Gleague.
Not really because the players in question are not NBA players. There is no guaranty that they will ever sign NBA contracts.
-
That doesn't quite address the 20-30% vs 50% revenue share
Seems like a strike could fix that for the women. But my argument is that of twitter remarks saying its unfair a high school senior will make more than a veteran wnba.
-
Not really because the players in question are not NBA players. There is no guaranty that they will ever sign NBA contracts.
"the G League will offer "Select Contracts" worth $125,000 to elite prospects who are at least 18 years old but not yet eligible for the NBA draft"
They are targeting the top of the top. The guys we know 100% are going in the top 5-10 in the draft, the ones who have no question they are one and dones. I highly doubt any of these players the Gleague signs will ever not get drafted barring a career ending injury.
-
"the G League will offer "Select Contracts" worth $125,000 to elite prospects who are at least 18 years old but not yet eligible for the NBA draft"
They are targeting the top of the top. The guys we know 100% are going in the top 5-10 in the draft, the ones who have no question they are one and dones. I highly doubt any of these players the Gleague signs will ever not get drafted barring a career ending injury.
So? What does that have to do with the value of the contracts you are offering G-League players, whose league is subsidized just as much if not moreso, than the WNBA is? (Which was the basis for your initial diatribe.)
-
Seems like a strike could fix that for the women. But my argument is that of twitter remarks saying its unfair a high school senior will make more than a veteran wnba.
say someone like Brian Bowen or Cliff Alexander we're making this money at 18 only to find out they suck... if you were a multiple time WNBA all star you'd be a bit peeved I'm sure
-
Has it been announced how many select contracts there are?
Also, there are 5-star recruits every year that end up never getting drafted. On top of that there are some that aren't ready to be drafted after one year. And on top of that there are always many who get drafted but then don't pan out. Some of the people who have expressed concern about players going straight to the g-league have pointed out that players might get exposed going against players older than them and hurt their draft status.
Now I'm not making an argument on the whole WNBA vs. G-league thing, I just don't think we can guarantee that every player who gets a select contract will end up getting drafted.
-
And fundamentally, where is it wrong to say that a 22-35 year old woman, probably with a college degree, is not worth more than a recent high school graduate?
The high schoolers are being paid for their potential, and no, more people would not show up at G-League games if they went there. They also would be unlikely to get exposure on National TV in Prime Time. It's a silly idea. But it is also probably a silly idea to draft all but a handful of recent HS grads into the NBA and hand them three year contracts worth up to $15 million or more. Maybe instead of G-League contracts, pay the kids with the most potential to become a red-shirt NBA player. Or the equivalent of the NFL practice squad. There has to be a better way than to stick these kids into a minor league with little or no development opportunity. Note that they change the name from the D-League to the G-League. $$ (sponsorship) means more to the NBA than development.
-
So? What does that have to do with the value of the contracts you are offering G-League players, whose league is subsidized just as much if not moreso, than the WNBA is? (Which was the basis for your initial diatribe.)
The NBA is banking on these players making the millions upon millions during their careers. The "subsidizing" you are referring to is completely different. The WNBA is subsidized with zero return. The NBA will see a return on it's investment the same as an MLB team supporting a AA team.
-
Has it been announced how many select contracts there are?
Also, there are 5-star recruits every year that end up never getting drafted. On top of that there are some that aren't ready to be drafted after one year. And on top of that there are always many who get drafted but then don't pan out. Some of the people who have expressed concern about players going straight to the g-league have pointed out that players might get exposed going against players older than them and hurt their draft status.
Now I'm not making an argument on the whole WNBA vs. G-league thing, I just don't think we can guarantee that every player who gets a select contract will end up getting drafted.
It would be the exact same case as HE. Drafting on potential not current skill. The NBA is moving towards a developmental mentality. And these kids will get much better teaching in the G league then college.
-
The NBA is banking on these players making the millions upon millions during their careers. The "subsidizing" you are referring to is completely different. The WNBA is subsidized with zero return. The NBA will see a return on it's investment the same as an MLB team supporting a AA team.
No it's the subsidizing *YOU* referred to in your initial post. You're in the process of shifting goalposts now.
-
The NBA is banking on these players making the millions upon millions during their careers. The "subsidizing" you are referring to is completely different. The WNBA is subsidized with zero return. The NBA will see a return on it's investment the same as an MLB team supporting a AA team.
That's not an apples to apples comparison. The NBA will be paying for these contracts whereas individual teams pay for the contracts of MLB minor leaguers. MLB teams directly benefit because they control the minor leaguer who can make their major league team better. The NBA doesn't really benefit from a player playing in the G-League. As long as the teams all have full rosters, the NBA makes money. So given that the WNBA is better attended and watched than the G-League, I would say the NBA gets a better return the WNBA.
Now, this all changes if the g-league does get a 1:1 minor to major league team and the teams start paying these contracts. Then it makes more sense.
-
No it's the subsidizing *YOU* referred to in your initial post. You're in the process of shifting goalposts now.
Am I though? I said the WNBA was completely subsidized by the NBA. That is true. And did you read the rest of the post?
"When the wnba isn't completely subsidized by their partner nba teams, when people actually show up to the games, and when people actually care about their product they can have an argument"
Are you going to sit here and say that the WNBA players have as much value to the NBA as any of the prospects they are talking about? You're arguing that a developmental league that's just finally being built up and the top level program for women both being subsidized is a valid arguing point against what I stated. Only one of these leagues being subsidized actually matters for the statement I made. Which to reiterate was talking about a very specific point in salary that a WNBA player stated on twitter.
This is the last post I am making on this topic with you. I see the way that you (And Wades, warrio da coough chicos, Pakuni, and Jay bee) argue to the death about things said on this board like children screaming about which superhero would beat another superhero. I don't feel like getting caught up in any of that.
So I'll say overall argument one last time, and you can feel free to respond to it: I believe that an elite 18 year old prospect in the GLeague brings more value to the NBA then the woman who posted on twitter saying that it was unfair that they will make more then the top level talent of the WNBA. I believe that when the WNBA brings more things of value to the table then the male prospects they will have a fair argument. (I also believe they are paid relatively well and in general think all sport athletes are very very overpaid)
-
Am I though? I said the WNBA was completely subsidized by the NBA. That is true. And did you read the rest of the post?
"When the wnba isn't completely subsidized by their partner nba teams, when people actually show up to the games, and when people actually care about their product they can have an argument"
Are you going to sit here and say that the WNBA players have as much value to the NBA as any of the prospects they are talking about? You're arguing that a developmental league that's just finally being built up and the top level program for women both being subsidized is a valid arguing point against what I stated. Only one of these leagues being subsidized actually matters for the statement I made. Which to reiterate was talking about a very specific point in salary that a WNBA player stated on twitter.
This is the last post I am making on this topic with you. I see the way that you (And Wades, warrio da coough chicos, Pakuni, and Jay bee) argue to the death about things said on this board like children screaming about which superhero would beat another superhero. I don't feel like getting caught up in any of that.
So I'll say overall argument one last time, and you can feel free to respond to it: I believe that an elite 18 year old prospect in the GLeague brings more value to the NBA then the woman who posted on twitter saying that it was unfair that they will make more then the top level talent of the WNBA. I believe that when the WNBA brings more things of value to the table then the male prospects they will have a fair argument. (I also believe they are paid relatively well and in general think all sport athletes are very very overpaid)
Why do you believe that though? Whether the prospect goes to the g-league, college, international, etc as long as they end up getting drafted when eligible they are worth an equal amount of money. Other than a possible boost to g-league attendance and ratings by having better players in that league, there is no benefit to the NBA.
-
That's not an apples to apples comparison. The NBA will be paying for these contracts whereas individual teams pay for the contracts of MLB minor leaguers. MLB teams directly benefit because they control the minor leaguer who can make their major league team better. The NBA doesn't really benefit from a player playing in the G-League. As long as the teams all have full rosters, the NBA makes money. So given that the WNBA is better attended and watched than the G-League, I would say the NBA gets a better return the WNBA.
Now, this all changes if the g-league does get a 1:1 minor to major league team and the teams start paying these contracts. Then it makes more sense.
I would have to argue the first point of comparison not being exact doesn't matter. We're looking at the development of players for the betterment of the league overall, not whos directly paying who. The development of these players adds value to the NBA, as well as the MLB.
The second point being does the NBA actually get a return from the WNBA at all? in 2016 half of the WNBA teams lost money, with some of the other half either barely making by. The NBA pays for those teams that do not turn a profit. I cant find anything that states how much the NBA makes off the WNBA, or loses, maybe you know of a source.
Lastly, I'm pretty sure thats where the GLeague is headed. It wasn't very long ago the DLeague was essentially worthless and not much time has passed since the NBA began this new venture. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't each team in the process of getting a GLeague affliate now. That and the two-way contracts are the first steps towards a real minor league.
-
Why do you believe that though? Whether the prospect goes to the g-league, college, international, etc as long as they end up getting drafted when eligible they are worth an equal amount of money. Other than a possible boost to g-league attendance and ratings by having better players in that league, there is no benefit to the NBA.
The players will play in an NBA system, with NBA rules, against loads better talent than in college. That plus being able to attend longer and more practices; have full access to agents, endorsements, and any training they or the nba sees fit. All of that adds up to better players faster then if they go to college or international.
-
I would have to argue the first point of comparison not being exact doesn't matter. We're looking at the development of players for the betterment of the league overall, not whos directly paying who. The development of these players adds value to the NBA, as well as the MLB.
I guess this is where we disagree. First I would say that the difference in development from the g-league vs. college (or anything else) is negligible. Second and more importantly, I don't think the quality of players really impacts the NBA all that much. The NBA is a star driven business. LeBron was going to be a star regardless of how he entered the league. Same with Steph and Durant and Giannis etc...I don't think any one of them would have been better if they had spent a year in the g-league. And if a player doesn't develop properly, there are hundreds more ready to take their place.
The second point being does the NBA actually get a return from the WNBA at all? in 2016 half of the WNBA teams lost money, with some of the other half either barely making by. The NBA pays for those teams that do not turn a profit. I cant find anything that states how much the NBA makes off the WNBA, or loses, maybe you know of a source.
Lastly, I'm pretty sure thats where the GLeague is headed. It wasn't very long ago the DLeague was essentially worthless and not much time has passed since the NBA began this new venture. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't each team in the process of getting a GLeague affliate now. That and the two-way contracts are the first steps towards a real minor league.
The second point being does the NBA actually get a return from the WNBA at all? in 2016 half of the WNBA teams lost money, with some of the other half either barely making by. The NBA pays for those teams that do not turn a profit. I cant find anything that states how much the NBA makes off the WNBA, or loses, maybe you know of a source.
Not much of one. But it's bigger than the G-League.
Lastly, I'm pretty sure thats where the GLeague is headed. It wasn't very long ago the DLeague was essentially worthless and not much time has passed since the NBA began this new venture. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't each team in the process of getting a GLeague affliate now. That and the two-way contracts are the first steps towards a real minor league.
I agree that it is heading this way. And when they get there and teams start paying for these contract, it makes total sense.
The players will play in an NBA system, with NBA rules, against loads better talent than in college. That plus being able to attend longer and more practices; have full access to agents, endorsements, and any training they or the nba sees fit. All of that adds up to better players faster then if they go to college or international.
Sure, I can understand why it could be better for the players (though I'm skeptical it will be that much better). I just don't see a scenario where people stop watching the NBA because the quality of players has dropped.
-
Am I though? I said the WNBA was completely subsidized by the NBA. That is true. And did you read the rest of the post?
"When the wnba isn't completely subsidized by their partner nba teams, when people actually show up to the games, and when people actually care about their product they can have an argument"
Yeah. This is where I pointed out that the average WNBA game draws five times the crowd of the average G League game.
-
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2018/10/19/detroit-pistons-g-league-henry-ellenson/1696437002/
-
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2018/10/19/detroit-pistons-g-league-henry-ellenson/1696437002/
I have this suspicion that had he gone to the GLeague from HS he wouldn't be pulling in the millions he is now.
-
Why do you believe that though? Whether the prospect goes to the g-league, college, international, etc as long as they end up getting drafted when eligible they are worth an equal amount of money. Other than a possible boost to g-league attendance and ratings by having better players in that league, there is no benefit to the NBA.
Adidas is paying these caliber players more, isn't that their market worth?
-
I have this suspicion that had he gone to the GLeague from HS he wouldn't be pulling in the millions he is now.
He was a tall guy who had a good handle. Someone was taking him in the first round either way.
-
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2018/10/19/detroit-pistons-g-league-henry-ellenson/1696437002/
Smoke and Mirrors
-
He was a tall guy who had a good handle. Someone was taking him in the first round either way.
Out of HS Henry was top 10. After 1 year of college he was #18. Everything I've seen says he was out of the 1st round by the end of his sophomore year and a late second rounder (if that) by his senior year. Guy can't shoot.
-
Adidas is paying these caliber players more, isn't that their market worth?
Not sure if teal so apologies if it's going over my head, but yes, that is their market worth to shoe companies, and they should be allowed to pursue that *cough* NCAA *cough*. To the NBA? I don't see it. These shoe companies are trying to lock these players down for their "team" and keep them from going to another team. Assuming these players are good enough, they aren't going anywhere but the NBA.
-
https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nba/pistons/2018/10/19/detroit-pistons-g-league-henry-ellenson/1696437002/
He feels like a G league player. He was a top 20 pick because that rookie class one of the worst NBA draft classes in years.
-
I have this suspicion that had he gone to the GLeague from HS he wouldn't be pulling in the millions he is now.
Forget GLeague. Had he gone to a Kentucky/Kansas/Duke/UNC, he would have seen little playing time, and may have never even made the NBA.
He benefitted supremely, by being able to be featured on a weak MU team. On a better team, or against better competition (GLeague), he would have been exposed and would have never seen his first big contract.
He should be thanking MU profusely, for what they got him and his family.
-
Forget GLeague. Had he gone to a Kentucky/Kansas/Duke/UNC, he would have seen little playing time, and may have never even made the NBA.
??? He would have clearly been in the rotation at any of those schools. Yeah his professional career has been a disappointment, but he was All-BE and freshman of the year in the conference. He probably would have been more efficient in a more limited role.
Let's not retroactively act as if the guy was a stiff.
-
The more I think about this, the more I think going straight to the G League is an absolute dead end.
First, it hurts marketability because playing for a college with millions of fans and playing in televised games builds a fanbase before you reach the NBA that the G League never will, or at least not for 40+ years.
Second, would you rather play against 352 NCAA teams with a lower talent level that will allow marquee 18-year-olds to stand out or against 25-29 year old men that will physically abuse you and are desperate to prove they deserve a shot at the league? Few players will increase their stock this way and many will see it decline.
Third, more games, worse travel and living conditions, less media exposure, the injury risk is higher while the benefits are lower.
Honestly, that comment from the agent seems correct. I'd guess very few players, if any, take "advantage" of this.
-
The more I think about this, the more I think going straight to the G League is an absolute dead end.
First, it hurts marketability because playing for a college with millions of fans and playing in televised games builds a fanbase before you reach the NBA that the G League never will, or at least not for 40+ years.
Second, would you rather play against 352 NCAA teams with a lower talent level that will allow marquee 18-year-olds to stand out or against 25-29 year old men that will physically abuse you and are desperate to prove they deserve a shot at the league? Few players will increase their stock this way and many will see it decline.
Third, more games, worse travel and living conditions, less media exposure, the injury risk is higher while the benefits are lower.
Honestly, that comment from the agent seems correct. I'd guess very few players, if any, take "advantage" of this.
I agree with this analysis.
-
The more I think about this, the more I think going straight to the G League is an absolute dead end.
First, it hurts marketability because playing for a college with millions of fans and playing in televised games builds a fanbase before you reach the NBA that the G League never will, or at least not for 40+ years.
Second, would you rather play against 352 NCAA teams with a lower talent level that will allow marquee 18-year-olds to stand out or against 25-29 year old men that will physically abuse you and are desperate to prove they deserve a shot at the league? Few players will increase their stock this way and many will see it decline.
Third, more games, worse travel and living conditions, less media exposure, the injury risk is higher while the benefits are lower.
Honestly, that comment from the agent seems correct. I'd guess very few players, if any, take "advantage" of this.
Don't underestimate the stupidity of 17 and 18 year old boys.
-
Don't underestimate the stupidity of 17 and 18 year old boys.
There's far more money in college and agents will know that. Hell, I'm confident Ayton & Zion got more than $125k and under the table, so tax free.
-
??? He would have clearly been in the rotation at any of those schools. Yeah his professional career has been a disappointment, but he was All-BE and freshman of the year in the conference. He probably would have been more efficient in a more limited role.
Let's not retroactively act as if the guy was a stiff.
Thank you.
-
??? He would have clearly been in the rotation at any of those schools. Yeah his professional career has been a disappointment, but he was All-BE and freshman of the year in the conference. He probably would have been more efficient in a more limited role.
Let's not retroactively act as if the guy was a stiff.
Not a stiff, but at least amongst my MU friends we didn't think his pro career would amount to much. So far it hasn't.
-
??? He would have clearly been in the rotation at any of those schools. Yeah his professional career has been a disappointment, but he was All-BE and freshman of the year in the conference. He probably would have been more efficient in a more limited role.
Let's not retroactively act as if the guy was a stiff.
I think you are missing a big gap between being a reasonable draft candidate and a stiff. At those Blue Bloods, he would have been the 8th or 9th guy in the rotation. Not because he was a stiff, but because there were better guys on those rosters.
HE had limitations, he was not particularly quick, couldn't play defense and was a marginal shooter. His strengths were size, handle and rebounding. For us, that happened to still be our number 1 option. He got showcased, that got him drafted.
He would not have been a top level option at a blue blood, and would likely have been at least a 3-4 year player, and very likely may never have been drafted.
He should be grateful for MU.
-
I don't think he would have been the 8th or 9th guy in the rotation at a blue blood. Yeah he got "showcased" at Marquette, but he was on draft radars even before he started college. I'm not sure how much his performance at Marquette played into his draft position.
-
would likely have been at least a 3-4 year player, and very likely may never have been drafted.
smh. This is a lie. Going elsewhere may have been BETTER for his draft stock after one year. Glad he came here (pause), but to pretend MU was his salvation isn't something I can agree with.
-
I don't think he would have been the 8th or 9th guy in the rotation at a blue blood. Yeah he got "showcased" at Marquette, but he was on draft radars even before he started college. I'm not sure how much his performance at Marquette played into his draft position.
Ineed, if it was the old rules and players didn't have to be a year out of HS to go to the NBA, Hankster might have gotten drafted earlier than he did.
-
Shams Charania
@ShamsCharania
Sources: Top high school-to-pro prospect Darius Bazley has signed an endorsement deal with New Balance, worth $14M and a guaranteed $1M. Bazley will spend year training ahead of 2019 NBA draft.
-
Shams Charania
@ShamsCharania
Sources: Top high school-to-pro prospect Darius Bazley has signed an endorsement deal with New Balance, worth $14M and a guaranteed $1M. Bazley will spend year training ahead of 2019 NBA draft.
ya I'd take that deal.
-
Shams Charania
@ShamsCharania
Sources: Top high school-to-pro prospect Darius Bazley has signed an endorsement deal with New Balance, worth $14M and a guaranteed $1M. Bazley will spend year training ahead of 2019 NBA draft.
I don't understand this. thats a ridiculous sum for someone not even guaranteed to make it. Especially when he won't have any true following out of the gate unless you consider a high school following worth that much
-
I don't understand this. thats a ridiculous sum for someone not even guaranteed to make it. Especially when he won't have any true following out of the gate unless you consider a high school following worth that much
Makes New Balance seem desperate.
-
I don't understand this. thats a ridiculous sum for someone not even guaranteed to make it. Especially when he won't have any true following out of the gate unless you consider a high school following worth that much
Kid is a pogo stick with some decent basketball IQ. However, as you point out he is a long way from a sure thing. Would be better off getting some experience playing in games at a higher rate of speed against physically strong players.
I like New Balance because they carry wide widths.
-
Makes New Balance seem desperate.
Does any NBA player endorse New Balance? They're like the prototype 50 year old man work shoe.
-
I don't understand this. thats a ridiculous sum for someone not even guaranteed to make it. Especially when he won't have any true following out of the gate unless you consider a high school following worth that much
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/sports/darius-bazley-g-league-new-balance.html
Says only $1m guaranteed. I think its a pretty cool bet. They can have him working with trainers and coaches all-year round to increase his skills, then they also have an incredible opportunity to market him and his journey. Unlimited photo shoots and video time. They can also give him media training and mold him better than any college player.
Not a guarantee but New Balance was never gonna compete with Nike/Jordan brand. They needed to buy a lottery ticket.
-
And fundamentally, where is it wrong to say that a 22-35 year old woman, probably with a college degree, is not worth more than a recent high school graduate?
The high schoolers are being paid for their potential, and no, more people would not show up at G-League games if they went there. They also would be unlikely to get exposure on National TV in Prime Time. It's a silly idea. But it is also probably a silly idea to draft all but a handful of recent HS grads into the NBA and hand them three year contracts worth up to $15 million or more. Maybe instead of G-League contracts, pay the kids with the most potential to become a red-shirt NBA player. Or the equivalent of the NFL practice squad. There has to be a better way than to stick these kids into a minor league with little or no development opportunity. Note that they change the name from the D-League to the G-League. $$ (sponsorship) means more to the NBA than development.
Its still better than sticking these kids in college where they play inferior talent with inferior systems (at least to what they will need to learn for development in the NBA).
-
Does any NBA player endorse New Balance? They're like the prototype 50 year old man work shoe.
I thought it was 70.
My wife always jokes that if I buy a pair of New Balance, I might as well just tuck in my shirt, hike up my pants, and go buy a cane.
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/sports/darius-bazley-g-league-new-balance.html
Says only $1m guaranteed. I think its a pretty cool bet. They can have him working with trainers and coaches all-year round to increase his skills, then they also have an incredible opportunity to market him and his journey. Unlimited photo shoots and video time. They can also give him media training and mold him better than any college player.
Not a guarantee but New Balance was never gonna compete with Nike/Jordan brand. They needed to buy a lottery ticket.
Just to remind you, that was the same logic you gave a few years ago about Henry being better off training in the NBA. The missing ingredient is competition . You can work out all you want but you still have to play a team sport at high speed. Not saying that Bazly can't do it, but he would sure be better off in my view actually spending a year playing whether it is in college , g league, overseas etc.
-
Just to remind you, that was the same logic you gave a few years ago about Henry being better off training in the NBA.
He was.
-
He was.
Henry was better off financially for sure. Not sure he really has gotten the NBA playing time he needs, last year was full of DNP coaches decision and it has shown in his results so far. My point for young Mr. Bazley is to spend a year playing against real competition and not relying on just training. That will only get him part of the way there.
-
Neva understood da hatred four Hank. Home grown 5-star who legitimized Wojo and wuz a furst rounder. Adds to Marquette's laundry list. Is he too white for y'all, hey?
-
Neva understood da hatred four Hank. Home grown 5-star who legitimized Wojo and wuz a furst rounder. Adds to Marquette's laundry list. Is he too white for y'all, hey?
I want him to do well because I support MU and the reasons you outline are correct. On the other hand until he does something in the NBA of note, I think he is always going to be a point of discussion because he left early. Kind of in the same camp as Vander in that regard. Henry has a coach in Don Casey who gives young players chances, so hopefully something happens for him this year.
-
I want him to do well because I support MU and the reasons you outline are correct. On the other hand until he does something in the NBA of note, I think he is always going to be a point of discussion because he left early. Kind of in the same camp as Vander in that regard. Henry has a coach in Don Casey who gives young players chances, so hopefully something happens for him this year.
If we are arguing that Vander/Henry missed a chance to leave a legacy at Marquette, you absolutely win. From a "remember when" standpoint they would've been way better off at Marquette.
We can agree to disagree, but if it was my career or my kids career I would want them 1. taking the money and 2. training with the best coaches and players day in and day out. If I had to chose having Henry train to become a better NBA player by going against Andre Drummond or Harry Froling, I take the NBA route every day.
-
HE inactive tonight. Gotta think his days in Detroit are numbered.
-
If we are arguing that Vander/Henry missed a chance to leave a legacy at Marquette, you absolutely win. From a "remember when" standpoint they would've been way better off at Marquette.
We can agree to disagree, but if it was my career or my kids career I would want them 1. taking the money and 2. training with the best coaches and players day in and day out. If I had to chose having Henry train to become a better NBA player by going against Andre Drummond or Harry Froling, I take the NBA route every day.
Blue would've been better served here another year. another run could've propelled him into the draft.
-
Blue would've might have been better served here another year. another run could've propelled him into the draft.
FIFY.
What if he played poorly? What if he got hurt? What if he played well and got drafted in the second round and then went on to do nothing for a year before ending up in the G-league (as is the case with most second-rounders)? I guess that latter scenario would have been better than what has happened, but not by much.
Staying definitely MIGHT have been a good thing for him. Maybe he would have had a spectacular senior season and played himself into the first round, but I kinda doubt it. Would it have certainly been better for him? Nah.
Plus, the kid just didn't like college. That's not a knock against him. A lot of kids feel that way - even a lot of non-athletes.
-
Vander has worked on his game endlessly since college and has had plenty of opportunities to show NBA teams what he can do. And he just isn't sticking.
Unless staying another year would have propelled him into the first round, and I highly doubt that would have happened, I don't think his career would have ended up all that different than it has already.
BTW, where is he playing this year? I know he was in Italy last Spring, but I don't think he is there now.
-
The year after he left, Blue got at least two 10-day contracts with the Celtics and Sixers. He definitely made more money in those two contracts than he would've as a senior, and I'm not sure his stock would've vaulted him any higher than as the fringe player he ended up becoming.