- 22,188
- 63,106
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2017
What if drafting a kid that early who’s not ready at all mentally or skillfully actually leads him to failure?
![img_13914858.jpg](/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fdxbhsrqyrr690.cloudfront.net%2Fsidearm.nextgen.sites%2Fgostanford.com%2Fimages%2F2020%2F1%2F15%2Fimg_13914858.jpg&hash=909d4b4af40b86dfa5df7ee3b60989bc)
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
What if drafting a kid that early who’s not ready at all mentally or skillfully actually leads him to failure?
2nd slide
Your Bron hate really knows no bounds.It was lame as ****, how he promised to do the Dunk contest, then flat out never did it.
Started this whole trend for real.
Eh, this is a garbage argument IMO. The guys who would be losing these spots aren’t the superstars who have made hundreds of millions of dollars. They’re the lower to middle class NBA guys who of course are trying to maximize their earnings. With the economics of having guys on cheaper contracts, plus the two-way deals with the G League — they’re absolutely at risk by the league lowering the limit. They should absolutely be thinking about their interests here.It's just sad to me to see that older players who already made their millions would use their influence to protect themselves rather than give young kids a chance. Lowering the draft age isn't gonna make GMs get rid of their entire roster for 18 years olds.
It’s not about competition, though. A lot of teams are more willing to take a flier on a young guy with upside over valuing what a vet can bring to a team. It’s not a competition argument at all. You can’t dismiss the money aspect because of course a team from a financial standpoint (especially if tax considerations are involved) would rather have the cheaper player.They should compete instead of trying to screw over young prospects out of fear. It's not about the money, it's about the selfishness.
You just described competition between potential value and known value. Teams make that decision already with people 19 & up. Players would rather rob time from kids than admit theirs is up.It’s not about competition, though. A lot of teams are more willing to take a flier on a young guy with upside over valuing what a vet can bring to a team. It’s not a competition argument at all.
so now collectively bargaining with your interests in mind = not admitting your time is up? I guess. When you have a league with 450 guys and a salary cap, with slotted salaries based on accomplishments and tenure, then of course there are going to be different interests across different classes of players. If you want more teams like Houston that are even more devoid of vets to teach guys how to be pros, than more power to you. That is an overall net negative for the league.You just described competition between potential value and known value. Teams make that decision already with people 19 & up. Players would rather rob time from kids than admit theirs is up.
It’s not that they “aren’t competing” though.They should compete instead of trying to screw over young prospects out of fear. It's not about the money, it's about the selfishness.
Your Bron hate really knows no bounds.![]()
I propose a 4-year degree for draft eligibility and a dedicated roster spot for players over 40Teams are going to be alotted a “Veteran Presence Contract” aka the Udonis Haslem Rule and it will be fine. Just one more roster spot. At ~$2MM (UD’s salary), teams can afford it.
I propose a 4-year degree for draft eligibility and a dedicated roster spot for players over 40
Other CWs and more details…