bobby bo wrote:
I'm reading your posts. I just don't understand why you're so concerned about the development of an athlete or the ways owners spend their money. If a team owner wants to spend his money on a risky, undeveloped prospect, they should be able to do so.
I dunno, because I'm a fan? I want to see the best product possible? I don't want to see every team with multiple roster spots committed to guys who aren't ready or able to contribute.
Wayne Rooney was physically developed enough to be a Premier League star for Everton when he was 16. Lots of other players weren't, so Everton didn't sign them.
LeBron James would have been developed enough to play for the Cavs when he was 16. Lots of other players would not be.
What counts as physically mature in soccer is completely different from basketball. And no, Lebron couldn't have played in the NBA at 16.
If a team signs someone who isn't ready, then that was a bad investment and they'll just have to be patient and wait for the player to develop. There's no harm in that other than the player not getting the in-game minutes they would get playing at a lower-level, but at the same time they are training with better players, coaches, trainers etc and making a lot of money that could significantly improve their family's position in life.
If you run a business and you think you've found a high school student that is the best candidate to fill a position in your company, by all means, hire that person. If you're wrong, you failed because you made a bad evaluation of that person's value.
You should know as well as anybody that NBA owners need to be protected from their own stupidity. Darko over Melo/Wade, Yi Jianlian dominating a chair in pre draft workouts, etc. College is the best approximation we have for the NBA. If you can succeed there, you are likely to at least be worth a roster spot in the NBA. Players that haven't played in college, especially straight out of high school, are extremely risky. Before the rule was instated we were heading towards 10 guys a year getting drafted from high school. Teams would be more or less forced to take them because that group would include practically every future superstar, but also a lot of duds. Making players prove themselves at the college level completely changes the risk profile. Josh Selby would have been the number one pick overall straight out of high school. He was the 49th pick after a year in college. Sucks for him, but helps the NBA and the fans. According to you the team that took him first would have made a bad business decision, even though everyone agreed he was the best. In reality, draft picks are pretty risky and there is way too much projection involved. The rule eliminates a large chunk of that uncertainty. Instead of pointing and laughing at all the bad picks in hindsight, why not do something about it?
The benefits of the rule are pretty obvious and pretty substantial. Everybody wins except the Josh Selbys of the world. If no one questioned Rose's character or integrity for his time in college we probably aren't even having this discussion.
Besides, you should love the rule. Without it Derrick Rose isn't playing for the Bulls.