Is The NBA Finally Ready To Change The One-and-Done Rule?

[Tugg Speedman]

Wait, so in 1 post you're saying that I'm wrong that the product has never been better and then in the very next post you're claiming that exactly what is occurring in college and professional basketball is exactly when basketball is at its best?  Yeesh.  I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here...

Which post did you read?  I said that college basketball coaches and Adam Silver disagree with you.  That is why they are looking at changing the rule.

Restated in MU82 terms ... you know more than the NBA commissioner about what his league needs to do.

Buy Apple!!!

[Dish]

Get rid of the NBA draft altogether.

Implement a rookie cap allotment, teams that don't make the playoffs will get equal allotments (to discourage tanking). Teams in playoffs get less. Instead of trading draft picks, teams can trade rookie cap space. Technically everyone can test the waters every year, but I think you'll see fewer fringe first round players from college every year going to the league.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

If players have to stay two years it would end up with Kentucky being something close to a true juggernaut with five or more NBA quality players who have a year of Division I experience under their belt on the team every year.  Right now, Kentucky is losing that primo talent around the time they finally have Division I figured out.

A big part of Kentucky's recruiting model is that their one and dones never have to go to class. That becomes a lot harder to do when players have to stay for multiple years. And while Kentucky gets to keep their players, it also forces more talented players to go to other schools because of finite scholarships and not wanting to play behind talented 2nd years. No one would be more devastated by the end of one and dones than Coach Cal.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

100% disagree.  It is unbalanced teams that make it more popular.

It is perceisely because Cleveland with LeBron plays against Golden State with Curry and Durant every year (three straight so far and counting) that makes the product so popular.  The NBA is about stars playing stars.  It works best when realistically 5 to 10 teams have a legit chance for the finals and the rest play the role of the Washington Generals.

College basketball is similar.  It is becuase the national champion is passed among 4 or 5 teams (loaded with one and dones) that make it popular.  If true parity ever came, and 30ish teams had a legit shot at winning it all, the product would suffer.

The NBA/basketball is the opposite of the NFL.  Basketball works best when parity does not exist and football works best when it has lots of parity.

First, I don't care about popular. I care about good basketball. Second, while I agree the NBA is fueled by super teams, I'm not sure that college basketball is. I think the idea that anyone can win in March is a huge part of the popularity of madness. Maybe super teams fuel the regular season ratings but I think the madness fuels March which is when college basketball makes its money.

[MU82]

First, I don't care about popular. I care about good basketball. Second, while I agree the NBA is fueled by super teams, I'm not sure that college basketball is. I think the idea that anyone can win in March is a huge part of the popularity of madness. Maybe super teams fuel the regular season ratings but I think the madness fuels March which is when college basketball makes its money.

Yep, Butler went to back-to-back title games, and that is part of the romance: "Maybe we can do it, too!" There is no way an NBA equivalent of Butler - say, the 2015-16 Charlotte Hornets or this season's Utah Jazz - goes to back-to-back NBA Finals.

[westcoastwarrior]

Next year the collective bargaining agreement changes the roster size in the NBA from 15 to 17 players.  The 2 extra players adds an additional 60 next year to the NBA.  The catch is...these two additional players are on a Two-Way contract between the Development League and the NBA.  These players are only allowed to spend 45 days with the NBA team.  This puts the pay scale for these players between $75,000 - $100,000....but you are stuck with that affiliation.  The better option for fringe players maybe to get the max contract on a D-League team (soon to be called G-League) which is $50,000 with the ability to be called up to any NBA team for a 10-day contract.  A 10-day contract can be anywhere between $45,000 - $75,000 depending on the number of games that occur between those 10 days.  A player would come out ahead if you happen to get 2 10-day contracts during the season.  Should be interesting to see how this is used in the NBA next year.

[Newsdreams]

Next year the collective bargaining agreement changes the roster size in the NBA from 15 to 17 players.  The 2 extra players adds an additional 60 next year to the NBA.  The catch is...these two additional players are on a Two-Way contract between the Development League and the NBA.  These players are only allowed to spend 45 days with the NBA team.  This puts the pay scale for these players between $75,000 - $100,000....but you are stuck with that affiliation.  The better option for fringe players maybe to get the max contract on a D-League team (soon to be called G-League) which is $50,000 with the ability to be called up to any NBA team for a 10-day contract.  A 10-day contract can be anywhere between $45,000 - $75,000 depending on the number of games that occur between those 10 days.  A player would come out ahead if you happen to get 2 10-day contracts during the season.  Should be interesting to see how this is used in the NBA next year.

You think NBA will allow players that flexibility I don't think they will.

[Tugg Speedman]

First, I don't care about popular. I care about good basketball. Second, while I agree the NBA is fueled by super teams, I'm not sure that college basketball is. I think the idea that anyone can win in March is a huge part of the popularity of madness. Maybe super teams fuel the regular season ratings but I think the madness fuels March which is when college basketball makes its money.

Yep, Butler went to back-to-back title games, and that is part of the romance: "Maybe we can do it, too!" There is no way an NBA equivalent of Butler - say, the 2015-16 Charlotte Hornets or this season's Utah Jazz - goes to back-to-back NBA Finals.

There are only a handful of teams that have a realistic chance of actually winning it.  They play on CBS.  The rest hope to get to the second week, they play on TruTV.

In the end, Butler lost to Uconn and Duke.  Bucky loses to Duke.

[Galway Eagle]

There are only a handful of teams that have a realistic chance of actually winning it.  They play on CBS.  The rest hope to get to the second week, they play on TruTV.

In the end, Butler lost to Uconn and Duke.  Bucky loses to Duke.

82 just said win in march. Most fans know that their team isn't going to win the whole thing so they cheer for a sweet 16 or final four etc. America loves upsets in march especially from random teams.

[wadesworld]

There are only a handful of teams that have a realistic chance of actually winning it.  They play on CBS.  The rest hope to get to the second week, they play on TruTV.

In the end, Butler lost to Uconn and Duke.  Bucky loses to Duke.

So Butler didn't have a realistic chance to win it all despite being an inch off of hitting the game winning shot?  Bucky didn't have a realist chance of beating Duke despite leading for a large majority of that game?  Interesting.  I'd say they certainly had realistic chances.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

There are only a handful of teams that have a realistic chance of actually winning it.  They play on CBS.  The rest hope to get to the second week, they play on TruTV.

In the end, Butler lost to Uconn and Duke.  Bucky loses to Duke.

I don't agree with the idea that they didn't have realistic chances to win given how close they were but that's beside the point. I don't think people watch because only a few teams have a realistic shot. I think people watch because anyone has a shot. There's a reason people are always cheering for David and not for Goliath (unless it screws over their bracket).

[MU82]

There are only a handful of teams that have a realistic chance of actually winning it.  They play on CBS.  The rest hope to get to the second week, they play on TruTV.

In the end, Butler lost to Uconn and Duke.  Bucky loses to Duke.

So if Hayward's shot goes in, that would have "proved" that the Butlers can win; because it went off the rim, it "proved" that they can't? Okey dokey then.

[Jockey]

Yep, Butler went to back-to-back title games, and that is part of the romance: "Maybe we can do it, too!" There is no way an NBA equivalent of Butler - say, the 2015-16 Charlotte Hornets or this season's Utah Jazz - goes to back-to-back NBA Finals.

In college, you only need to beat the better team one time and upsets are not unusual.

In the NBA, you have to beat a better team 4 times and that rarely happens.

[MU82]

Over the weekend, a friend reminded me that the NBA's new collective bargaining agreement with its players hasn't even take effect yet - that happens in a few days. Then, it can't be re-opened by either side until after the 2022-23 season.

Given that rules pertaining to the draft are part of this agreement, all of the talk of potential changes in 1 & Dones - and pretty much any other labor issue - is just that: talk. Because it seems evident that nothing's gonna change for at least 5 more years.

Now, could both sides agree to re-open the draft portion of the agreement and renegotiate it? I suppose. But it would cost the owners a TON to get the players to agree on adding a second year before they can start earning dough-re-mi.

So chalk this up as another subject that's fun to talk about but that has little to do with reality. At least imminent reality.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Honestly, I think the players would be happy if the one and done rule changed.  Less chance of young unproven players coming in and taking their minutes. It will help current players at the expense of future players but I don't think that would bother them at all.  Of course,  the players association will still use it as a bargaining chip to get something from the owners.

[Stretchdeltsig]

Honestly, I think the players would be happy if the one and done rule changed.  Less chance of young unproven players coming in and taking their minutes. It wise help current players at the expense of future players bit I don't think that would bother them at all.  Of course,  the players association will still use it as a bargaining chip to get something from the owners.

Agreed that change needs to be made.  Players develop well under college coaching in competitive programs. 

Would love to see a 21 year old age limit to jump to the NBA.

Let's face it, college basketball is much more exciting than the NBA. 

[MUfan12]

Let's face it, college basketball is much more exciting than the NBA.

In March.

[Jockey]

Agreed that change needs to be made.  Players develop well under college coaching in competitive programs. 

Would love to see a 21 year old age limit to jump to the NBA.

Let's face it, college basketball is much more exciting than the NBA.

Out of curiosity, would you like a 21 year old age limit for all sports or just the NBA?

[MU82]

Honestly, I think the players would be happy if the one and done rule changed.  Less chance of young unproven players coming in and taking their minutes. It will help current players at the expense of future players but I don't think that would bother them at all.  Of course,  the players association will still use it as a bargaining chip to get something from the owners.

TAMU, you really believe the Players Association would prefer to set a precedent of delaying that all-important second contract by a year? Hmmm.

Are there individual players who agree with you? I'm sure there are. But as a group? Hard to believe it. And even if the group does believe it, it won't give it away without getting something significant back from the owners. Most players I see quoted say the fairest thing would be to go back to letting kids go from preps to pros. (As an aside, Coach K just said that last week!!!!)

[wadesworld]

TAMU, you really believe the Players Association would prefer to set a precedent of delaying that all-important second contract by a year? Hmmm.

Are there individual players who agree with you? I'm sure there are. But as a group? Hard to believe it. And even if the group does believe it, it won't give it away without getting something significant back from the owners. Most players I see quoted say the fairest thing would be to go back to letting kids go from preps to pros. (As an aside, Coach K just said that last week!!!!)

Exactly. The owners would need to give up something significant. And if the argument is that kids are better served to develop in college then I don't think the pros will be worried about them coming up and stealing their money or minutes.

[GGGG]

The NBA players union head made it clear a couple years ago that the NBA should "Be happy with one & done, it's not going to be two & done."

[oldwarrior81]

I thought one proposal a bit out of the box was to start the clock on the end of the first pro contract based on the players high school class.

If the player comes to the NBA straight out of high school, then he's under team control for 5 years.   maybe a three year guarantee for first rounders, and two team option years.
One year of college ball before entering the NBA, the team has control for 4 years.
...
Four years in college and the NBA team has control for only 1 year after the player is drafted.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I thought one proposal a bit out of the box was to start the clock on the end of the first pro contract based on the players high school class.

If the player comes to the NBA straight out of high school, then he's under team control for 5 years.   maybe a three year guarantee for first rounders, and two team option years.
One year of college ball before entering the NBA, the team has control for 4 years.
...
Four years in college and the NBA team has control for only 1 year after the player is drafted.

The problem with that is NBA teams would be even less likely to draft seniors.  Even if the player is great, you might only have them for one year.  What is the incentive?

My outside of the box proposal would be:

1.  Let players turn pro out of HS.
2.  1st round picks get 6 year contracts with 4 years guaranteed and the last two years club options.
3.  No restricted free agency; if the club declines the option the player is an unrestricted free agent.
4.  After 4 years, there is an exclusive negotiating window where the player and team can agree to an extension of 4 or 5 years above the rookie pay scale. This would supersede the two option years but the exclusive negotiating window closes at the start of season 5.  For example, Cleveland drafts Lebron.  Cleveland gets him for 4 years then either A) Declines his options making him an UFA, B) Picks up both his option years, meaning they get him for 6 years on the rookie scale, or C) They agree to an extension with Lebron that nullifies the rookie scale in years 5 & 6.  Lebron gets the benefit of making more money in years 5 & 6 but Cleveland locks him in for 8-9 years.
5.  Some sort of rule 5 draft like baseball has.  After 3 years, players who have failed to meet some sort of game appearance threshold (82? 100? 123?) are eligible for the rule 5 draft.  Draft order matches NBA draft order and this could be either a 1 or 2 round draft.  Teams that select a player forfeit a draft pick to the team a player was selected from.  For former 1st round picks with option years, the first option year (year 5) on the player's contract becomes fully guaranteed and the 2nd option year (year 6) becomes 50% guaranteed; there would also be an exclusive extension window between years 5-6 of the players contract to sign a 3 year extension that nullifies the rookie scale in year 6.
6.  Scrap the max contract and soft cap.  Go to a pure hard cap.  Make salary cap management matter. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

TAMU, you really believe the Players Association would prefer to set a precedent of delaying that all-important second contract by a year? Hmmm.

Are there individual players who agree with you? I'm sure there are. But as a group? Hard to believe it. And even if the group does believe it, it won't give it away without getting something significant back from the owners. Most players I see quoted say the fairest thing would be to go back to letting kids go from preps to pros. (As an aside, Coach K just said that last week!!!!)

I don't think the NBAPA gives two craps about players. And if they do, they only care about current players, not future. I also don't think current players give two craps about future players. I think they would be all to happy to delay young guns from getting into the NBA because it means they have a better chance of getting more minutes and better contracts. I do believe that the NBAPA knows the owners want this badly and thus will use it as a huge bargaining chip, possibly meaning that this will never happen.

[wadesworld]

I don't think the NBAPA gives two craps about players. And if they do, they only care about current players, not future. I also don't think current players give two craps about future players. I think they would be all to happy to delay young guns from getting into the NBA because it means they have a better chance of getting more minutes and better contracts. I do believe that the NBAPA knows the owners want this badly and thus will use it as a huge bargaining chip, possibly meaning that this will never happen.

If the players and the NBAPA want it and the NBA owners want it it will happen. The NBAPA isn't going to pass up on something they consider to be a positive just because the owners want it. They'll ask for something they might be able to get in return.

I think the NBAPA and the players care (a lot) more than you think about current and future players.