Congressman compares NBA age limit to slavery

[johnnyrondo]

Thinking outside the box, what if NCAA teams were allowed to offer two paid internship scholarships each? Maybe you could require these internships be for 2 years. This would also improve the competitive balance in the NCAA, stop the one and done situations, and compensate players for the revenues they bring to their colleges.

Another idea: What if players could be drafted out of HS and guaranteed a stipend from the NBA team which drafted them after two yrs in college?

[indeedproceed]

Thinking outside the box, what if NCAA teams were allowed to offer two paid internship scholarships each? Maybe you could require these internships be for 2 years. This would also improve the competitive balance in the NCAA, stop the one and done situations, and compensate players for the revenues they bring to their colleges.

Another idea: What if players could be drafted out of HS and guaranteed a stipend from the NBA team which drafted them after two yrs in college?

Wouldn't be amateur sports. You can't legitimately pay college athletes.

[Roy Hobbs]

I mention this because you often hear the age limit is supposed to protect the players from themselves, but the reality is, it hurts players just as much if not more frequently than it helps them.  The NBA is clearly helped, but at the detriment to college and the players.  How that is deemed a good system I couldn't tell you.

It hurts certain players; it helps others.  If Gerald Green doesn't get drafted, or falls to the second round, he is undoubtedly hurt.  However, some other kid is helped, because he went from a second rounder to a first rounder with a guaranteed contract.

[indeedproceed]

I mention this because you often hear the age limit is supposed to protect the players from themselves, but the reality is, it hurts players just as much if not more frequently than it helps them.  The NBA is clearly helped, but at the detriment to college and the players.  How that is deemed a good system I couldn't tell you.

It hurts certain players; it helps others.  If Gerald Green doesn't get drafted, or falls to the second round, he is undoubtedly hurt.  However, some other kid is helped, because he went from a second rounder to a first rounder with a guaranteed contract.

The NBA needs major makeover skills.

[Fafnir]

I mention this because you often hear the age limit is supposed to protect the players from themselves, but the reality is, it hurts players just as much if not more frequently than it helps them.  The NBA is clearly helped, but at the detriment to college and the players.  How that is deemed a good system I couldn't tell you.

It hurts certain players; it helps others.  If Gerald Green doesn't get drafted, or falls to the second round, he is undoubtedly hurt.  However, some other kid is helped, because he went from a second rounder to a first rounder with a guaranteed contract.

That is an excellent point. There are 30 first round picks every year no matter the age limit.

[nickagneta]

First off to clarify an earlier statement, I am against most public policies that restrict employment based on age. Public policies on age should be made to protect the greater good and not discriminate against people of certain age.

That said, this is not a public policy but a policy that 2 different private companies have that have been upheld in a court of law. Really, how many people per year does this effect? The NBA has learned their lessons about drafting 18 year olds that aren't mentally ready for the league. Way too many of these kids are ruined by getting into the league and all that money too early.

Their policy is made to give those kids another year of growing up and seeing what life not at home is all about while simultaneously maturing their games and themselves.

And in reality, just how many kids are we talking about that this effects every year and how many does it truly adversely effect? The last three of years before the age restriction took place there were 9 or less players chosen in the first round:

2003 - 5 18 year olds - LeBron, Darko, Perk, Ndudi Ebi and Travis Outlaw
2004 - 9 18 year olds - Howard, Shaun Livingston, Biedrins, Swift, Telfair, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith and JR Smith
2005 - 4 18 year olds - Martell Webster, Bynum, Yaroslav Korelev, Gerald Green

How many would have still been guaranteed to be a first round pick after one year in college? 2, 3, maybe 4. The rest it can all be argued could really have used a year or more playing at a lower competitive level that would have better prepared them for the NBA and made their careers longer and more lucrative in the league.

The following three yeas here are the 19 year olds that came out each year:

2006 - Tyrus Thomas, Shawne Williams
2007 - Oden, Durant, Conley, Brandon Wright, Spencer Hawes, Jarvis Crittendon, Daequan Cook
2008 - Rose, Beasley, Mayo, Love, Gordon, Bayless, Anthony Randolph, JJ Hickson, Kostas Koufos, Donta Green.

Now look at this group. Just how many would have been guaranteed first round picks if they came straight from high school? Oden, Durant, Rose, Beasley and Mayo is all that I can fully give as guaranteed. Much of the rest got drafted in the first round because of what they did at the college level. Does Koufos, Green, Hickson, Bayless, Cook, Crittendon, Conley, Hawes, Williams or Thomas really get drafted in the first round as 18 year olds? I doubt it!!

This rule does a lot of players really good and over two three year periods it can be argued that this rule would have adversely effect maybe 7-9 players. Even then if you were to ask those players that were held back a year, I'm not sure all would say it was a bad thing for them.

Darko, Korelev, and Biedrins don't count since they were foreign.  

Of the Americans drafted, about half probably would have been hurt by going to college because there flaws would have been exposed and thus they would lost money.  That is the thing that never seems to be discussed.  

I was at the University of Cincinnati when Kenny Satterfield came (way before the age limit).  He was projected as a mid-20's draft pick before stepping foot on a college campus.  He thought a year of college would have moved him into the top ten.  He played ok as a freshman and decided to come back to school.  He had a very strong second year and went pro.  He was the 25th pick in the SECOND ROUND.  He played a couple of years making the NBA minimum before leaving the league all together.  Had he come out as a freshman, he would have made about 10 times the dollars and maybe would have even got a second contract.  

I mention this because you often hear the age limit is supposed to protect the players from themselves, but the reality is, it hurts players just as much if not more frequently than it helps them.  The NBA is clearly helped, but at the detriment to college and the players.  How that is deemed a good system I couldn't tell you.

The foreigners count because they were 18.

And the thing you guys are not seeing is what did a year in college do for Mike Conley, Tyrus Thomas, Kostas Koufos, and Daequan Cook? If these guys had declared when 18 they could easily have fallen into the second round or not been drafted. They could all have gotten agents. Then what? They are off to the NBDL or Europe or the local Walmart for a job. They never have an NBA career because some agent convinced them and their family they would get drafted and suddenly they never see the NBA.

Having to prove your NBA worth by playing in the minor leagues, overseas or in college is a good thing. And if Livingston was injured in college he would at least have his college scholarship intact so that he could finish his education and get a real job and career like the other 99.99999999% of us. Also, you discount the growth in an 18 year olds game that some time in college would mean. Especially for someone like Telfair who my have gotten away from the bad influences from his past and grown as a player. Who knows, if he had done that maybe he's looking at his next contract at being at $8-10 million a year instead of the vastly lower salary he will be receiving. This is a very probable scenario that can't be discounted.

[Chris]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/sports/basketball/05stern.html?_r=3&ref=basketball


This sounds pretty ridiculous imho. Sounds like pathetic pandering as well. Not many baseball 18 yr olds are on major league teams, if any. They're in the minors. Business wise it makes sense for Stern to not want 18 yr olds in the NBA. They should call the NBA age limit rule the "Gerald Green Prevention Rule."  Then again he was like 21 when he finished HS. 

It does make sense for the nba, and the guys analogy is quite extreme, but the practice is still quite crooked.

 it is denial of employment for the express purpose of trying to force these players to play for free (in theory anyway) at the NCAA level, for all intents and purposes a minor league business partner of the NBA.

The player assume tons of injury risk and risk to their draft status to play for free at a basketball vocational school that they have no intention of finishing for educational purposes while the NCAA cashes in and the NBA gets another year to look at its future draft picks.

 that's why i have zero problem with them going overseas till they are 19.

I think the NBA could care less if players go to college or not.  This is all about saving the owners money.  They don't want to be paying millions of dollars to "develop" 18 year old players.  They want to be paying players who are already developed, and can come right in, make their team better, and fill the seats.

Personally, I like the age limit.  For every Lebron James, there are 10 Gerald Greens who are taking up roster space, and salary cap money that could be used on veterans who already know how to play, and could be putting a better product on the floor.

And of course the idea of this interfering with anyone from making a living is ludicrous.  Every job has restrictions and qualifications.  Whether it is a minimum age limit, or a certain degree, or a certain number of years of experience.  The NBA even provides an alternative so these kids can play basketball, develop their skills, and make money while doing it, if they don't want to go to college, or play in Europe.  They can play in the NBDL.  

[Moranis]

I mention this because you often hear the age limit is supposed to protect the players from themselves, but the reality is, it hurts players just as much if not more frequently than it helps them.  The NBA is clearly helped, but at the detriment to college and the players.  How that is deemed a good system I couldn't tell you.

It hurts certain players; it helps others.  If Gerald Green doesn't get drafted, or falls to the second round, he is undoubtedly hurt.  However, some other kid is helped, because he went from a second rounder to a first rounder with a guaranteed contract.

my point is no one ever talks about the guys that are actually hurt by going to college.  

And since you mentioned him, if Gerald Green goes to college do you think he is still the 18th pick in the draft at any point thereafter.

[PosImpos]

First off to clarify an earlier statement, I am against most public policies that restrict employment based on age. Public policies on age should be made to protect the greater good and not discriminate against people of certain age.

That said, this is not a public policy but a policy that 2 different private companies have that have been upheld in a court of law. Really, how many people per year does this effect? The NBA has learned their lessons about drafting 18 year olds that aren't mentally ready for the league. Way too many of these kids are ruined by getting into the league and all that money too early.

Their policy is made to give those kids another year of growing up and seeing what life not at home is all about while simultaneously maturing their games and themselves.

And in reality, just how many kids are we talking about that this effects every year and how many does it truly adversely effect? The last three of years before the age restriction took place there were 9 or less players chosen in the first round:

2003 - 5 18 year olds - LeBron, Darko, Perk, Ndudi Ebi and Travis Outlaw
2004 - 9 18 year olds - Howard, Shaun Livingston, Biedrins, Swift, Telfair, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith and JR Smith
2005 - 4 18 year olds - Martell Webster, Bynum, Yaroslav Korelev, Gerald Green

How many would have still been guaranteed to be a first round pick after one year in college? 2, 3, maybe 4. The rest it can all be argued could really have used a year or more playing at a lower competitive level that would have better prepared them for the NBA and made their careers longer and more lucrative in the league.

The following three yeas here are the 19 year olds that came out each year:

2006 - Tyrus Thomas, Shawne Williams
2007 - Oden, Durant, Conley, Brandon Wright, Spencer Hawes, Jarvis Crittendon, Daequan Cook
2008 - Rose, Beasley, Mayo, Love, Gordon, Bayless, Anthony Randolph, JJ Hickson, Kostas Koufos, Donta Green.

Now look at this group. Just how many would have been guaranteed first round picks if they came straight from high school? Oden, Durant, Rose, Beasley and Mayo is all that I can fully give as guaranteed. Much of the rest got drafted in the first round because of what they did at the college level. Does Koufos, Green, Hickson, Bayless, Cook, Crittendon, Conley, Hawes, Williams or Thomas really get drafted in the first round as 18 year olds? I doubt it!!

This rule does a lot of players really good and over two three year periods it can be argued that this rule would have adversely effect maybe 7-9 players. Even then if you were to ask those players that were held back a year, I'm not sure all would say it was a bad thing for them.

Darko, Korelev, and Biedrins don't count since they were foreign.  

Of the Americans drafted, about half probably would have been hurt by going to college because there flaws would have been exposed and thus they would lost money.  That is the thing that never seems to be discussed.  

I know this probably sounds awful but...good!

If a player has flaws and they aren't really 1st round material, they don't deserve to get drafted in the first round and make first round NBA money.  Maybe that 'hurts' the players by exposing guys who have inherent flaws and preventing them from being drafted in the 1st round or even being drafted at all.  But I don't feel bad for those guys.  If they don't have the skills or the work ethic or the athleticism to make it in the NBA, well, they shouldn't be drafted in the first place.

It hurts the teams and the organizations and the fans a lot more when a guy is drafted with a lot of 'potential' and then a bunch of fatal flaws or injury-weaknesses are exposed after they are already drafted and paid a lot of money.

[bobdelt]

I love how Stern mentioned that Congress has an age limit - which is much higher than the NBA's....that's hilarious.

[Brendan]

Its a screwy rule based on screwy rules.

1. The NBA and the league should not be considered competing entities, they should be considered a single entity.
2. The union laws in the US are screwy.
3. The NCAA is full of hypocrites.
4. Private associations should be allowed to discriminate to their hearts content.

If all these things were fixed the NBA would be able to have any age limit it wanted anyways. So I'm fine with it. If some 18 year old doesn't like it - blame the union. The union is the one who agreed to these demands, including prominent players who made a ton of money by being able to enter directly (i.e. Lebron, Kobe, KG, et al.) The union is the one who sends these kids into the rookie salary cap, etc.

In terms of competition - if the NBA was paying the rookies so little money, another league could come along and start getting all the good talent and force the NBA's hand. For example like the CBA. You might not like that IBM won't hire you without a CS degree, if you're good enough - you go start Microsoft. If these kids have a problem with the NBA they can:
1. go elsewhere - like Europe
2. suck it up - like most players do
3. start their own league (hahahahahhaha)
4. find a different line of work

the reason they don't do 3 or 4, is the expected earnings are much lower. they will start doing 1 in more and more numbers, since the expected earnings are higher.

Also I don't think the Doctor and Lawyer analogies are good: those are really gov't regulations on who can practice a line of work. If you don't like the law firm's policy - you cannot go into business as a lawyer following your own rules. Granted the trade associations use those rules to raise the barrier of entry for their members, but its government run. The government doesn't stop new leagues from forming - the business environment does. (And for the record, I disagree with most professional licensing. My wife has been a paralegal for 7 years and probably could write your will and plan your trust better than most lawyers at her firm - who tend to be associates with 1-3 years experience - yet she's not allowed to. Not that its something she wants to do. Consumers should be able to make up their own minds about who they trust for information, services, and goods.)

[Roy Hobbs]

And since you mentioned him, if Gerald Green goes to college do you think he is still the 18th pick in the draft at any point thereafter.

No, and it doesn't bother me.  League rules shouldn't be about ensuring that a slacker with tremendous leaping ability but little work ethic earns a paycheck.  Rather, it should be about protecting the NBA product as a whole, which benefits everyone, including collectively the players.

[cordobes]

Stern says he'd like NBA players to play competition after high school, to get them ready for the NBA.  A similar practice by the NFL was held to be legal in Federal court.

Requiring people to develop skills prior to entering the work force is a fairly common practice.  I was required to spend seven years in post-high school education and earn two degrees before I was allowed to sit for the Bar examination.  Should I sue, because I think I should have been eligible to practice law after college, or after my first year of law school?  Or that I should have immediately been allowed to enter law school, without having to go to college first?

Many, many occupations require pre-job training.  An age limit for the purpose of acquiring better skills isn't, to me, a bad thing, and it certainly isn't akin to slavery.

It seems fairly uncommon to me however to try to prevent willing employers from hiring willing employers.

Who are the willing employers? If you mean the NBA teams, the supposed willing employers were the ones who put the age limit in place. I don't understand who are those willing employers.

Is there any law that prevents the creation of a basketball league that allows its teams to hire 18 years old kids? If not, I really can't understand what's the big deal.

The NBA teams voted on this? That would seem unnecessary. If they really didn't want 18 year olds in the league then stop drafting them.  

I am assuming the NBA has an anti-trust exemption, like the MLB, and if they're going to discriminate then I assume the government can say something about that

Of course, who do you think that makes this kind of decisions on the NBA if not the owners? I mean, they own the teams but also the league. As I've said, the rule is there to protect teams from themselves. There are millions of examples of auto-regulation in the business world, I don't see what makes this case different.

The anti-trust exemption doesn't prevent anyone from starting a basketball league, does it? (the anti-trust exemption wouldn't be needed if there wasn't a ridiculous anti-trust law in the 1st place; anyway, I think it's ridiculous to invoke the anti-trust law to legitimise the government interference in a private business).

In the end, there's no individual or right that the age limit puts at a risk. Even if you understand the "right of playing pro-basketball at the age of X" as a right that should be protected, the NBA age limit doesn't affect it.

[Moranis]

And the thing you guys are not seeing is what did a year in college do for Mike Conley, Tyrus Thomas, Kostas Koufos, and Daequan Cook? If these guys had declared when 18 they could easily have fallen into the second round or not been drafted. They could all have gotten agents. Then what? They are off to the NBDL or Europe or the local Walmart for a job. They never have an NBA career because some agent convinced them and their family they would get drafted and suddenly they never see the NBA.

What makes you think those guys would have declared?  I mean seriously none of them were anywhere close to being projected as lottery picks and for the most part they weren't even first round projections (koufos was and he might have never gone to school).  Just because they were eligible doesn't mean they would have declared.  It has always been about draft projections and those guys weren't highly projected players.  

Having to prove your NBA worth by playing in the minor leagues, overseas or in college is a good thing. And if Livingston was injured in college he would at least have his college scholarship intact so that he could finish his education and get a real job and career like the other 99.99999999% of us. Also, you discount the growth in an 18 year olds game that some time in college would mean. Especially for someone like Telfair who my have gotten away from the bad influences from his past and grown as a player. Who knows, if he had done that maybe he's looking at his next contract at being at $8-10 million a year instead of the vastly lower salary he will be receiving. This is a very probable scenario that can't be discounted.

Yes but Livingston was injured after gaining a 10 million + guaranteed contract.  He can pay his way into school and get a degree since he now has the money.

Or maybe Telfair's flaws as a player are exposed and instead of a lottery pick with a huge contract, maybe he ends up in round 2 or not drafted at all.  

[bdm860]

I was at the University of Cincinnati when Kenny Satterfield came (way before the age limit).  He was projected as a mid-20's draft pick before stepping foot on a college campus.  He thought a year of college would have moved him into the top ten.  He played ok as a freshman and decided to come back to school.  He had a very strong second year and went pro.  He was the 25th pick in the SECOND ROUND.  He played a couple of years making the NBA minimum before leaving the league all together.  Had he come out as a freshman, he would have made about 10 times the dollars and maybe would have even got a second contract. 

I mention this because you often hear the age limit is supposed to protect the players from themselves, but the reality is, it hurts players just as much if not more frequently than it helps them.  The NBA is clearly helped, but at the detriment to college and the players.  How that is deemed a good system I couldn't tell you.

Here's my thing though, this makes it sound like Kenny Satterfield deserved to earn millions of dollars.

It turns out Kenny Satterfield was not an NBA caliber player, at least a top notch NBA player. so I'm glad he didn't earn that big day (broadly speaking, I don't know anything about Kenny personally).

Players that go to college and it hurts their draft stock, know what I say to that: GOOD!  If they can't really cut it, I don't want to see them get paid  (from my merchandise purchases, my ticket purchases, etc.) more then they actually should.  Why should they get paid on potential, outside of sports, who gets paid on potential?  Some of you make it sound like an injustice that these guys would miss out on making money that they didn't rightfully earn.  When to me it seems more like they're missing out on a loophole to make more money then they actually deserve.


Edit - ah I see PosImpos beat me to the punch with almost the exact same thoughts.  I guess I type slower, TP.