MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Not A Serious Person on May 12, 2020, 09:29:39 AM
-
The Start of a Talent Drain in the College Basketball Game
Top high-school prospect Jalen Green and a couple of other highly-rated players will be part of the NBA’s rebooted Professional Pathway program
May 11, 2020
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-start-of-a-talent-drain-in-the-college-basketball-game-11589194872?mod=hp_listc_pos4
Armed with a bigger checkbook than in years past, the G-League has suddenly emerged as a disruptive force for Duke, Kentucky and other big programs that rely on one-and-done talent who are all trying to lure the very best high-schoolers. Since launching the Professional Pathway program in 2018, Abdur-Rahim said G-League executives have been in the stands alongside college coaches hunting for talent.
“We were at all of those events: USA Basketball events, top 100 camps, NBA Players’ Association camps,” he said.
After the first year of the program, he said, the G-League identified some problems to work out. For starters, it wasn’t offering enough money. The program’s maximum salary of $125,000 wasn’t enough to persuade kids to turn down a college scholarship or a mid-six figure salary offer from a foreign league, such as Australia’s National Basketball League.
-
Maybe. In these uncertain times... some people...
This has been floating around for a while. There are kids who just don't want to go to school. Always have been. And there have long been stories akin to the ones floating around about Zion. And for a while, a number of kids went straight from high school to the NBA.
There are a lot of other uncertainties out there at the moment. This one is fairly far down my list of concerns.
-
Free market.
They are young adults that ought to be able to do what they feels is best for themselves.
-
Did college basketball survive when the NBA was drafting 18 year olds? It will survive this, Most college fans root for the names on the front of the jersey.
-
I do not see the G league continuing to pay for players. All pro sports are going to struggle financially in the near future. There is no reason to throw away $500,000 on players that will not bring in revenue to pay for them.
-
A lot of these kids who think they are ready for The League don't always pan out.
Many of them are still raw talent that need time to sharpen their skills.
Even when their families get the straight dope from the NBA scouts, those ne'er do wells who whisper sweet nothings in their ears tell them to ignore that advice and just jump.
As a previous poster stated, the game of college basketball has survived these NBA incursions in the past and will survive them again.
If anything, a number of these premature departures by star players will even out the playing field in college hoops, making it as exciting as ever.
Let's face it, there is so much talent around the country for college teams that it will keep the game very competitive even without those big names that opt for The League.
As Johnny "Red" Kerr told me once: "There are no secrets in the NBA. Everyone knows who's good."
Go Warriors!
-
IMHO, the top 50 RSCI kids each year could not play college basketball (go to G-league, Europe, wherever) and this would have a minor impact on revenues. I also believe the quality of the game would still be plenty entertaining to watch.
I would argue whatever revenues lost on CBB due to the top 50 not playing, would be the same revenue loss if not more of college basketball fans watching less NBA because their favorite college players would not be playing in that league.
Now if you started to remove the top 200 players? The quality of the game may suffer enough to have a more serious impact.
-
I just don't understand the thought process for these kids going straight to the G League. The G League is full of grown ass men who were absolute studs in college basketball. Unless you're a hands down consensus top 5 pick type, how are you going to improve your draft stock going to the G league for a year? Will you even play? Obviously the $500k is nice, but $500k only goes so far, especially if this decision ultimately costs these guys a lottery pick (and the guaranteed $$$ that comes with that) they would have gotten by going to college for a couple years and being a really good player. I just don't see the risk/reward benefit.
As mentioned, the calculus is a bit different if you're a guy that is a surefire top 3-5 pick and can likely compete with the G league guys day in and day out. But most top 25 type kids can't, and their game is just going to get exposed, and they're likely to be sitting on the bench most of the season. Maybe they improve during practice playing against grown men, but are you really showcasing your game then? Are you improving your draft stock?
Plus you're punting the college experience - which may be a benefit for some - don't have to worry about classes, and have some coin in your pocket, but I just don't think it makes sense for most of these guys who are likely to toil away in the G league for a year, end up getting paid less than a living wage the following year after their 1 year $500k G league deal is up, and be forced to go overseas to make some money as a 21 year old kid. Some would say not all bad. I don't disagree necessarily - but I just don't think that is the path most of these guys think they're taking.
With respect to the impact on CBB as whole - I think its minimal. Obviously it would be better for all of the best eligible players to play CBB - but we're talking about a handful of kids spread across 350 teams. Even if you want to just eliminate all programs except high majors, its still just a handful of guys spread across 75+ teams. Just not going to make the big of an impact IMO.
-
Frankly .. I think MU is better off with a "talent drain."
-
Frankly .. I think MU is better off with a "talent drain."
Yup.
-
The extremely poor officiating and mainly block/charge calls are far more detrimental than a few kids going pro.
Can’t fault a kid who has no interest in school to go pro and cash in.
-
Agree with the majority. This is another worthless topic on the board. Simply the intro to the return of Freshmen to the NBA. A dozen or so kids who don't want to be playing College BB won't be forced to waste a year of their life "in school".
-
Immaterial effect on the overall quality of college hoops.
-
Agree that impact, if any, will be minimal. College ball will be just as thrilling and with kids that want to be there.
-
Did college basketball survive when the NBA was drafting 18 year olds? It will survive this, Most college fans root for the names on the front of the jersey.
college basketball was excellent from 1995 to the start of the one and done era. 1998 Kentucky, 1999 UConn (beating a LOADED Duke team in the finals), 2000 MSU, 2001 Duke, 2002 Maryland, 2005 UNC (that whole Final Four was loaded) were great upperclassmen dominated teams. I'm more than happy to see a return to those days.
-
Who were the top prospects that would've skipped on recent champs? Okafor and Unibrow are the only two that ring a bell to me though I don't remember the UNC team that won it.
-
college basketball was excellent from 1995 to the start of the one and done era. 1998 Kentucky, 1999 UConn (beating a LOADED Duke team in the finals), 2000 MSU, 2001 Duke, 2002 Maryland, 2005 UNC (that whole Final Four was loaded) were great upperclassmen dominated teams. I'm more than happy to see a return to those days.
College basketball was pretty excellent before then as well. There were a lot of great teams in the 70’s and 80’s as well
-
College basketball was pretty excellent before then as well. There were a lot of great teams in the 70’s and 80’s as well
For sure, but I was just referencing the post-Garnett era when kids were jumping straight to the pros. I'd stack up some of those champs against any of the champs over the last twelve years. 2000 MSU would have blitzed everyone in last year's Final Four and even some of the runners up, like 2005 Illinois, 1999 Duke, 2001 Arizona, 2003 Kansas (sorry) and 1997 Kentucky. among others, are better than many of the champs from the one and done era.
-
For sure, but I was just referencing the post-Garnett era when kids were jumping straight to the pros. I'd stack up some of those champs against any of the champs over the last twelve years. 2000 MSU would have blitzed everyone in last year's Final Four and even some of the runners up, like 2005 Illinois, 1999 Duke, 2001 Arizona, 2003 Kansas (sorry) and 1997 Kentucky. among others, are better than many of the champs from the one and done era.
The Anthony Davis Kentucky team would beat every one of those teams.
-
For sure, but I was just referencing the post-Garnett era when kids were jumping straight to the pros. I'd stack up some of those champs against any of the champs over the last twelve years. 2000 MSU would have blitzed everyone in last year's Final Four and even some of the runners up, like 2005 Illinois, 1999 Duke, 2001 Arizona, 2003 Kansas (sorry) and 1997 Kentucky. among others, are better than many of the champs from the one and done era.
I agree with this. I also think there are a wide variety of reasons why, including one-and-done.
-
The Anthony Davis Kentucky team would beat every one of those teams.
I’d listen to this argument. Davis was an unicorn.
-
So we should be sad that kids who don’t even want to go to college have found a different route?
Why?
-
This is really really dumb, what 10 kids leave out if 4200? D1 players.
So what?
-
The Anthony Davis Kentucky team would beat every one of those teams.
that's why I said "most." That was an awesome team. However, some of the other champs (UVA, 2010 Duke, 2011 UConn, for example) were weak champions compared to those early and mid-2000's champs.
-
This is really really dumb, what 10 kids leave out if 4200? D1 players.
So what?
Also, makes sense to abandon the amateur model and lets the kids pay their way off earnings. I'm sure that will work out well for the 99%.
Look, I know the P6 schools and others will find "jobs" to foot the bill for the players but the vast majority of DI schools will suffer. Might be time for D1-A for the bigger schools.
-
These high schoolers aren't going to end up In Oshkosh or Fort Wayne on a regular G League team.
They're going to be together in one camp, working with coaches that have NBA experience, preparing them to play in the NBA. I think I read Sam Mitchell will be one of the coaches.
There also will be a few select veteran players that will work with them. They may play no more than 10-12 games all season against the existing G League teams.
-
I just don't understand the thought process for these kids going straight to the G League. The G League is full of grown ass men who were absolute studs in college basketball. Unless you're a hands down consensus top 5 pick type, how are you going to improve your draft stock going to the G league for a year? Will you even play? Obviously the $500k is nice, but $500k only goes so far, especially if this decision ultimately costs these guys a lottery pick (and the guaranteed $$$ that comes with that) they would have gotten by going to college for a couple years and being a really good player. I just don't see the risk/reward benefit.
As mentioned, the calculus is a bit different if you're a guy that is a surefire top 3-5 pick and can likely compete with the G league guys day in and day out. But most top 25 type kids can't, and their game is just going to get exposed, and they're likely to be sitting on the bench most of the season. Maybe they improve during practice playing against grown men, but are you really showcasing your game then? Are you improving your draft stock?
Plus you're punting the college experience - which may be a benefit for some - don't have to worry about classes, and have some coin in your pocket, but I just don't think it makes sense for most of these guys who are likely to toil away in the G league for a year, end up getting paid less than a living wage the following year after their 1 year $500k G league deal is up, and be forced to go overseas to make some money as a 21 year old kid. Some would say not all bad. I don't disagree necessarily - but I just don't think that is the path most of these guys think they're taking.
With respect to the impact on CBB as whole - I think its minimal. Obviously it would be better for all of the best eligible players to play CBB - but we're talking about a handful of kids spread across 350 teams. Even if you want to just eliminate all programs except high majors, its still just a handful of guys spread across 75+ teams. Just not going to make the big of an impact IMO.
I agree a ton of guys have looked like absolute world beaters against college players and have parlayed that into a ton of money as lottery or first round picks, only to be exposed over the life of their contract. To accept far less money to take the significantly greater chance of getting exposed by professionals does not seem the best route to me. Myself and most others on this board, have much more wisdom, i am sure, than the players or families making the decision. The jails and graveyards of the world are full of people that felt it couldnt happen to them. For every kid that left early and made it there are probably 50 baggin groceries
-
The Anthony Davis Kentucky team would beat every one of those teams.
The 2015 Kentucky team was even better. They just didn’t win the title. They’re the best team of the last 20 years and I’m not even sure it’s close.
-
Didn't Nova's second championship team set the record for margin of victory in the tournament or something? I just remember that championship game being really boring because it was essentially over with 10 minutes to go. Ability to play 5 out, 5 future NBA players (plus Booth in the G-League). Have an outside shot of getting a sixth player from that roster into the NBA with either Samuels or Gillespie. Think I might take that team over Davis' UK, although it's close.
-
I think this is great both for the kids who can go to G league and for college basketball. If you're good enough to get paid - go get paid. If you're not elite as an 18 year old, develop yourself and your skills in a college program. Hopefully the NCAA will allow student athletes to get paid a reasonable amount as well.
I predict a scenario where this helps some teams with good coaching and good player development who recruit kids in the 25-200 rank range and get them to stay 3-4 years. The coaches with a good system would be able to develop players for their system and win more games. The Calipari's of the world, who couldn't coach a dog out of a cage but consistently get the top 10 recruits would be the ones who struggle.
Finally if you look at normal G league salaries, or normal salaries from 2nd level overseas leagues where an 18 year old could play, the NCAA could remain competitive by offering school + room & board + a small amount of $$... for example:
- Top 50 teams $30k/year per player
- 50-150 $20k/year per player
- 150+ $10k/year per player
This is all a better deal than a standard G league salary, or living in some crappy apartment in serbia with 3 room-mates while making $5k/month for 4 months per year and wondering if you'll ever get paid at all...
-
The 2015 Kentucky team was even better. They just didn’t win the title. They’re the best team of the last 20 years and I’m not even sure it’s close.
They are definitely in the argument.
-
I do not see the G league continuing to pay for players. All pro sports are going to struggle financially in the near future. There is no reason to throw away $500,000 on players that will not bring in revenue to pay for them.
I think this is an important point. For Jalen Green's sake, I hope he already signed that contract. With every sport experiencing a significant decrease in revenue for next year and trying to renegotiate existing player salaries, I don't see much money available for stuff like this. I still don't see how paying these kids that much money to participate in a training program makes sense for the NBA, let alone all the supporting players, coaches and other expenses, but it's their money. I could even see them potentially cancelling the entire G-League for next year.
-
A talent drain? I think in terms of the numbers involved it is better characterized as a talent drip, and a slooow one at that.
-
A talent drain? I think in terms of the numbers involved it is better characterized as a talent drip, and a slooow one at that.
Ho kidding.