Syracuse PG Tyler Ennis declares for the 2014 NBA Draft.

[RightToCensor]

:applause:

[RightToCensor]

http://nbadraft.net/players/tyler-ennis

[Clyde]

good player....i say he goes just outside the top 10.

also Go Canada!

[RightToCensor]

Late lotto-top 20 pick

Good PG, but not elite potential coming out of college. Would be really good under Horni and the Phoenix Suns.

[IncarceratedBob]

The Canadian Rondo

[Clyde]

Late lotto-top 20 pick

Good PG, but not elite potential coming out of college. Would be really good under Horni and the Phoenix Suns.

One GM said he take Ennis over Irving....not sure who it was because they're scared to attach their name to something so bold.

The kid has great poise under pressure and didn't turn the ball over much.

[RightToCensor]

I see Steph Curry w/o his elite jumpshot as his ceiling.

[KyrieTheFuture]

One GM said he take Ennis over Irving....not sure who it was because they're scared to attach their name to something so bold.

The kid has great poise under pressure and didn't turn the ball over much.
That GM should probably be fired then

[cranincu]

just another syracuse scrub

[Clyde]

just another syracuse scrub

say whaaaaat?

[oarabbus]

say whaaaaat?


More like Tyler Pennis.

[midatlantic09]

He's basically another Cory Joseph.

[RightToCensor]

He's basically another Cory Joseph.
http://www.nbadraft.net/players/cory-joseph

vs.

http://nbadraft.net/players/tyler-ennis

[Sarcastic]

good player....i say he goes just outside the top 10.

also Go Canada!

Aren't you one of these that wants players to have a post graduate degree before entering the NBA? You should be hating this decision by him, and not worrying about where he goes.

[outbreak]

He won't be a star but he looks to me like one of those guaranteed contributors that will have a long career as a starter on a poor team or a good bench piece people want.
If orlando don't end up with a guard with our first pick I'd love to have him around with the second first rounder.

[Le Shaqtus]

This is already a Point Guard heavy league, he's going to struggle.

[Clyde]

Aren't you one of these that wants players to have a post graduate degree before entering the NBA? You should be hating this decision by him, and not worrying about where he goes.


My argument is that it would be more beneficial to the players progression and the NBA if they stayed in school for more then a year.

I understand your side of the argument about the risk of injury effecting draft position , but I was never arguing that point.

Do I believe Tyler Ennis would be better prepared day 1 of his NBA career if he stayed in school an extra year? Absolutely.

I enjoy seeing the Canadian kids in the draft because i utter detest hockey, and glad to see my countries efforts to develop basketball players is paying off.


Frankly the next CBA will put an end to discussions like this as players will be staying in school for a minimum of 2 years, or the age of 20. ( thats my guess anyhow.)

[Clyde]

Also I'd like to point out that the general consensus is that most rookies (1 and done) aren't ready physically to play an 82 game schedule, especially big men.

Maturity is other thing...these KIDS are 18-19 years old, and are being paid multi-million dollars a year. The high draft pick are expected in most cases to lead their team, something I don't think you can be mentally prepared for after only 1 year of college.

anyhow you have your opinion and I have mine.

[Sarcastic]

I'm just not sure how you come to the conclusion that staying is better for development. The HS to pros and one & dones have done better than the kids that stayed for 2 years or more.

Look at guys like Kyrie, Rose, Durant, etc who are superstars. The 2and dones have taken much longer to develop like Derrick Williams and Johnny Flynn who I am not even sure if he's still playing.

[Clyde]

I'm just not sure how you come to the conclusion that staying is better for development. The HS to pros and one & dones have done better than the kids that stayed for 2 years or more.

Look at guys like Kyrie, Rose, Durant, etc who are superstars. The 2and dones have taken much longer to develop like Derrick Williams and Johnny Flynn who I am not even sure if he's still playing.

For everyone that works out there is one that didn't.

Ill get back to this thread after the madness is over tonight.

[RightToCensor]

LaVine is a less polished version of Westbrook. He is pretty much a smaller Gerald Green right now.

Ennis is able to create for his teammates because he is one of the more patient PGs in the draft. That is a lost art in my opinion; look how some of the best passing point guards play. Rubio, Paul, Rondo, Wall, and Lawson all play patently and look to create for their teammates before scoring themselves unlike Westbrook, Irving, and Jennings (who all would/has struggled when they were the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd option).

Ennis has that trait and if he can live up to his potential, he can be a very good PG in the future.

Posted this in another thread why Ennis > LaVine and why he has the potential to be an very good PG in the NBA.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

I don't get the hype. Most of the attention he got was because he hit clutch shots on an undefeated team. Well they faltered, his stats are still average, and he stopped making clutch baskets.

I don't even see how he's better than Trey Burke from last year's draft.

[RightToCensor]

I don't get the hype. Most of the attention he got was because he hit clutch shots on an undefeated team. Well they faltered, his stats are still average, and he stopped making clutch baskets.

I don't even see how he's better than Trey Burke from last year's draft.
Trey Burke is actually a decent PG, his season really took a halt from missing the beginning of the season and everyone having their eyes on MCW and Oladipo.

Burke is a bit undersized, but makes up for by his ability to score.

Ennis on the other hand is a pass-first PG with a nice ability to get in the paint.

[KyrieTheFuture]

This is already a Point Guard heavy league, he's going to struggle.
Mario Chalmers and Kendall Marshall play serious minutes in this league. The thought that PG is stacked is so overblown

[Le Shaqtus]

Mario Chalmers and Kendall Marshall play serious minutes in this league. The thought that PG is stacked is so overblown

Marshall is an excellent Point Guard, his defense is lacking but as a play maker he is exceptional.

Chalmers is needed to shoot 3's because their real point is LeBron, so yeah he's pretty shit as a point guard on any other team.

[sketchy]

I've never been so sure about a college point guard. He will be at least a solid contributor for his career. I see a lot of Kirk Hinrich in his game. Love this guy.

[Sarcastic]

For everyone that works out there is one that didn't.

Ill get back to this thread after the madness is over tonight.


Of course some will be busts. No player has ever been a 100% lock guarantee. But there is no proof at all that shows staying longer helps development. All it does it take away potential years of earnings for the players, and allows the teams to pay less for development.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Trey Burke is actually a decent PG, his season really took a halt from missing the beginning of the season and everyone having their eyes on MCW and Oladipo.

Burke is a bit undersized, but makes up for by his ability to score.

Ennis on the other hand is a pass-first PG with a nice ability to get in the paint.

My post wasn't meant to put down Burke. What I meant was, Burke likely won't be CP3 or GOATbrook, or Dragic or Wall, or maybe not even Isaiah Thomas. A good PG overall, however the top quality of PGs is too high right now. There was post a couple weeks back asking where Lawson ranks in the NBA among PGs. People were saying outside the top 10 and he's an 18/9/3.5 player...

Ennis may be good overall, but what is good in this era of PGs? You take your chance on someone like Exum because his upside might break you away from that clutter of merely "good" PGs. Otherwise, I'll would rather take my chance on a... Well let's see. Ennis is projected 14th on DraftExpress. I would rather draft Gary Harris (15), Stauskas (17), Hairston (22), and McDaniels (23) of other first round picks behind him. Then you have PGs like Russ, Napier, Cotton, and Kane all projected in the 2nd or undrafted. I'm not convinced Ennis is so much more superior to any of those guys.

I mean if you need a PG then take him. I think he's a safe pick. I just wouldn't use a lottery pick on him and the safety/lack of upside (imo) maybe doesn't outweigh the lower floor/higher ceiling of other players behind him in this draft.

[ZenMaster]

I'm just not sure how you come to the conclusion that staying is better for development. The HS to pros and one & dones have done better than the kids that stayed for 2 years or more.

Look at guys like Kyrie, Rose, Durant, etc who are superstars. The 2and dones have taken much longer to develop like Derrick Williams and Johnny Flynn who I am not even sure if he's still playing.

Those players are one and dones because they are very talented, John Wall was more talented than Johnny Flynn.

They get more physically and mentally ready from staying 2 years, their level of play in their rookie year would EVEN BETTER than what you have seen as a one and done.
The one thing you hear about most of the one and dones, especially big men, is that they need to put on muscle and fill out their frames.

It would make the general level of play in the NBA better, there's no doubt about it.

[Wavves]

I'd love to see the Magic draft him with their second pick

[Qwyjibo]

Smart move for him if it looks like he'll be a lottery pick. Even if it's "just" being picked in the 10-15 range, there's no point in risking another year at school.

[Sarcastic]

Those players are one and dones because they are very talented, John Wall was more talented than Johnny Flynn.

They get more physically and mentally ready from staying 2 years, their level of play in their rookie year would EVEN BETTER than what you have seen as a one and done.
The one thing you hear about most of the one and dones, especially big men, is that they need to put on muscle and fill out their frames.

It would make the general level of play in the NBA better, there's no doubt about it.


Of course a more mature player will be better than himself at a younger age, but there is zero proof that college can do a better job of development than the pros can.


And just because the NBA might feel the level of play is better, does not mean they can break the law, and discriminate against age, unless it is collectively bargained.

[Clyde]

Of course a more mature player will be better than himself at a younger age, but there is zero proof that college can do a better job of development than the pros can.


And just because the NBA might feel the level of play is better, does not mean they can break the law, and discriminate against age, unless it is collectively bargained.

Off topic....the next cba will be a total shit show......lock out city

[secund2nun]

Those players are one and dones because they are very talented, John Wall was more talented than Johnny Flynn.

They get more physically and mentally ready from staying 2 years, their level of play in their rookie year would EVEN BETTER than what you have seen as a one and done.
The one thing you hear about most of the one and dones, especially big men, is that they need to put on muscle and fill out their frames.

It would make the general level of play in the NBA better, there's no doubt about it.

It would be dumb for them to return if they can be a lottery pick unless they have #1 overall ability but for some reason have inexplicably slipped to a late lottery projection, but that very rarely happens as even underachieving high talents are taken high for their potential.

If they return they risk injury and ruining their NBA career...not to mention you waste a year where you could have been earning a NBA salary that you never get back...and father time isn't gonna give them an extra year to make up for the burned year.

Also a player improves more in the NBA playing against NBA players then they do in college playing against inferior players in a totally different style of play. Plus in the NBA you train all day long while in college there are practice time limits.

[ZenMaster]

Of course a more mature player will be better than himself at a younger age, but there is zero proof that college can do a better job of development than the pros can.


And just because the NBA might feel the level of play is better, does not mean they can break the law, and discriminate against age, unless it is collectively bargained.

I'm not saying the development is better in college, everything just gets pushed back a year and these players would still get their development AND they'd contribute more to actual wins because they'd be physically better prepared for their first 82 game season.
NBA owners don't want to pay for their development if they can push it a year.

NBA is worried about the level of play in the league, they're not worried about teenagers becoming millionaires a year earlier or later in their life.

If the NFL can discriminate against age so can the NBA, it's a private company and all it has to is be collectively bargained, which it probably will be per Adam Silver.


It would be dumb for them to return if they can be a lottery pick unless they have #1 overall ability but for some reason have inexplicably slipped to a late lottery projection, but that very rarely happens as even underachieving high talents are taken high for their potential.

If they return they risk injury and ruining their NBA career...not to mention you waste a year where you could have been earning a NBA salary that you never get back...and father time isn't gonna give them an extra year to make up for the burned year.

Also a player improves more in the NBA playing against NBA players then they do in college playing against inferior players in a totally different style of play. Plus in the NBA you train all day long while in college there are practice time limits.

If it was the rule that they had to stay in college a 2nd year then it's not "a dumb decision", it's just something they have to do. The potentially dumb decision would be staying the 3rd year.

Yeah teenagers lose a year where they could get injured, NBA owners don't care about that. If they play in the NBA there's just as big or bigger chance that they get hurt there, and if they don't play they instead do most of their development on the bench which NBA owners don't want to pay for.
Like I said, NBA owners don't care if a kid that age becomes a millionare a year earlier or later in their life, and quite frankly neither do I, I just want to watch better NBA basketball.

In the NBA they don't train all day long? Do you realize just how many games 82 is and how much travel it takes to get through those 82 games?

[Sarcastic]

If the NBA doesn't want to pay for development, how about they also stop paying for decline years. What if they only want to pay for prime years. To be in the NBA, you have be between 24-34. Why should guys like Kobe, or Nash, be eating up huge chunks of salary cap space, when it is clear as day they can no longer contribute meaningfully anymore. Would you be ok with that?


I mean if you're ok with restricting an 18 or 19 year old from making a living, then you should be ok with restricting a 34+ year old from making a living as well, considering he is FAR better off, and has made his millions already.

[ZenMaster]

If the NBA doesn't want to pay for development, how about they also stop paying for decline years. What if they only want to pay for prime years. To be in the NBA, you have be between 24-34. Why should guys like Kobe, or Nash, be eating up huge chunks of salary cap space, when it is clear as day they can no longer contribute meaningfully anymore. Would you be ok with that?


I mean if you're ok with restricting an 18 or 19 year old from making a living, then you should be ok with restricting a 34+ year old from making a living as well, considering he is FAR better off, and has made his millions already.

But the NBA doesn't only want to pay for prime years 24-34, it's not worth discussing something that has no point and wouldn't happen. What they do want though is a 20 year old age limit. The NFL has set a precedence for this so it's not uncommon.

You must agree with this then: If NBA teams should pay for players development then why only after they turn 19? Why risk having players getting injured before that? Why even let them go play in college or high school? Why shouldn't they pay for their development from age 14 or 15 or even younger?
Why risk poor development or injury for a player out of the NBA environment at all, I mean NBA teams develops players better than any high school or college could right?

[Sarcastic]

But the NBA doesn't only want to pay for prime years 24-34, it's not worth discussing something that has no point and wouldn't happen. What they do want though is a 20 year old age limit. The NFL has set a precedence for this so it's not uncommon.

You must agree with this then: If NBA teams should pay for players development then why only after they turn 19? Why risk having players getting injured before that? Why even let them go play in college or high school? Why shouldn't they pay for their development from age 14 or 15 or even younger?
Why risk poor development or injury for a player out of the NBA environment at all, I mean NBA teams develops players better than any high school or college could right?

Because there are actually laws in this country with regards to the legal age to work. 18 happens to be that age. It is illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of age. It is entirely legal to discriminate against minors though.

[ZenMaster]

Because there are actually laws in this country with regards to the legal age to work. 18 happens to be that age. It is illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of age. It is entirely legal to discriminate against minors though.

I don't think the NBA is concerned with the age limit of working, they're more concerned with optimizing the level of the NBA product.

Doesn't matter how many times you say "they can't do that", they can and they probably will.

[Sarcastic]

The NBA and NFL are two very different leagues as well, with highly different levels of contact, so the age restriction for the NFL is warranted, as people don't want to see young kids getting destroyed by grown men.


The NHL, and MLB both allow 18 year olds to enter, so there is precedence for keeping the age at 18 also. And as a matter of fact, most teams in those leagues prefer to get 18 year olds into their systems, so that they can develop them better.

[Sarcastic]

I don't think the NBA is concerned with the age limit of working, they're more concerned with optimizing the level of the NBA product.

Doesn't matter how many times you say "they can't do that", they can and they probably will.


The only way it can be done is if the Player's Union agrees to it, and the only way they will agree to it is if there is a major concession from the owners, like a big portion of the money.

[ZenMaster]

The NBA and NFL are two very different leagues as well, with highly different levels of contact, so the age restriction for the NFL is warranted, as people don't want to see young kids getting destroyed by grown men.


The NHL, and MLB both allow 18 year olds to enter, so there is precedence for keeping the age at 18 also. And as a matter of fact, most teams in those leagues prefer to get 18 year olds into their systems, so that they can develop them better.

So you can do one or the other, NBA can choose whatever they want.

The NHL and MLB have much much better minor league development systems in place than the NBA, they draft those kids with the intent of them developing in those minor leagues, and the reason for that is that those kids aren't either physically or mentally ready.

[ZenMaster]

The only way it can be done is if the Player's Union agrees to it, and the only way they will agree to it is if there is a major concession from the owners, like a big portion of the money.

They'll lock the players out for half a season or more and they'll agree to these things.

[Sarcastic]

They'll lock the players out for half a season or more and they'll agree to these things.


I highly doubt Silver wants another lockout, at the beginning of his era, all over the age of 19 or 20 year olds coming into the league.

[ZenMaster]

I highly doubt Silver wants another lockout, at the beginning of his era, all over the age of 19 or 20 year olds coming into the league.

They're going to have a lockout anyways for a hard cap.

[Qwyjibo]

The only way it can be done is if the Player's Union agrees to it, and the only way they will agree to it is if there is a major concession from the owners, like a big portion of the money.
Would that really be a big issue with the player's union though? They're all in the NBA already. Unless they feel a sense of duty to prospective players, the union will be looking out for what will make them the most money too. If the league and owners show that an age limit will by improving the NBA product, the players will agree to it.

I'm not saying it's right because I'm not in favour of age limits but in the end, the business of the NBA is what matters to them.

[Jyap9675]

Tier 2 PG, reminds me of Eric Maynor. Ceiling would probably be Jeff Teague.

[Clyde]

I highly doubt Silver wants another lockout, at the beginning of his era, all over the age of 19 or 20 year olds coming into the league.

it's really not silvers fault if it did happen...usually the union and the league are in constant talks...

...who represents the union right now? No one.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/silver-2-years-college-best-230845430--nba.html

Also keeping players in the NCAA will greatly benefit college basketball. Ratings and money wise.

''There has to be a balance in terms of the economic opportunity and us putting the best product on the floor in the NBA. It's awfully risky to use your first pick on someone with limited experience in college and, to me, the right balance would be two years.'' - Adam Silver

[hawksdogsbraves]

Tier 2 PG, reminds me of Eric Maynor. Ceiling would probably be Jeff Teague.

He's not similar to Teague at all, but I agree that he'll never be a star. I would not pick him in the lottery, his ceiling is too low considering how many good PG's are in the league right now.

[secund2nun]

I'm not saying the development is better in college, everything just gets pushed back a year and these players would still get their development AND they'd contribute more to actual wins because they'd be physically better prepared for their first 82 game season.
NBA owners don't want to pay for their development if they can push it a year.

NBA is worried about the level of play in the league, they're not worried about teenagers becoming millionaires a year earlier or later in their life.

If the NFL can discriminate against age so can the NBA, it's a private company and all it has to is be collectively bargained, which it probably will be per Adam Silver.



If it was the rule that they had to stay in college a 2nd year then it's not "a dumb decision", it's just something they have to do. The potentially dumb decision would be staying the 3rd year.

Yeah teenagers lose a year where they could get injured, NBA owners don't care about that. If they play in the NBA there's just as big or bigger chance that they get hurt there, and if they don't play they instead do most of their development on the bench which NBA owners don't want to pay for.
Like I said, NBA owners don't care if a kid that age becomes a millionare a year earlier or later in their life, and quite frankly neither do I, I just want to watch better NBA basketball.

In the NBA they don't train all day long? Do you realize just how many games 82 is and how much travel it takes to get through those 82 games?

I agree that for the NBA it would be better. As for training games are how you get better. You get a lot more practice and training in the NBA than in college.

[ZenMaster]

I agree that for the NBA it would be better. As for training games are how you get better. You get a lot more practice and training in the NBA than in college.

I'm a bit confused, you think they get more training because they play more games, or because they both play more games and practice more?

[senelcoolidge]

These one and done guys if they even pan out typically take 2-3 years to become decent..the amount of time it would have taken them had they stayed in school. Some teams don't have that patience. Some guys are good enough to be good from the beginning but most guys fizzle out or take time. Projects.

[Clyde]

These one and done guys if they even pan out typically take 2-3 years to become decent..the amount of time it would have taken them had they stayed in school. Some teams don't have that patience. Some guys are good enough to be good from the beginning but most guys fizzle out or take time. Projects.

:applause:

[Sarcastic]

Would that really be a big issue with the player's union though? They're all in the NBA already. Unless they feel a sense of duty to prospective players, the union will be looking out for what will make them the most money too. If the league and owners show that an age limit will by improving the NBA product, the players will agree to it.

I'm not saying it's right because I'm not in favour of age limits but in the end, the business of the NBA is what matters to them.


Yes it would be a big issue with the union, because the agent's are a part of the negotiation process as well, and those kids are their future clients. If the current crop of players were the only ones being considered, they would sign a deal that is awesome for them, but would completely screw over future generations of players.

[Sarcastic]

These one and done guys if they even pan out typically take 2-3 years to become decent..the amount of time it would have taken them had they stayed in school. Some teams don't have that patience. Some guys are good enough to be good from the beginning but most guys fizzle out or take time. Projects.


Anthony Davis has taken 2-3 years to pan out? He's in his second year, and is a superstar.


Contrast him with Thomas Robinson, who stayed 3 years at Kansas. He's already been on 3 teams in 2 years. Do you think Sacramento was better off picking Robinson, or 1 and done Andre Drummond?



You guys are making generalized statements without any facts or truth behind them.

[senelcoolidge]

Anthony Davis has taken 2-3 years to pan out? He's in his second year, and is a superstar.


Contrast him with Thomas Robinson, who stayed 3 years at Kansas. He's already been on 3 teams in 2 years. Do you think Sacramento was better off picking Robinson, or 1 and done Andre Drummond?



You guys are making generalized statements without any facts or truth behind them.

I said the majority of players. Davis is one of those exceptions. The league is getting clogged up with projects.

[Sarcastic]

I said the majority of players. Davis is one of those exceptions. The league is getting clogged up with projects.


I don't have the full article here, but you are incorrect

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10594203/nba-making-case-one-done-players



NBA commissioner Adam Silver has suggested that an additional year in college will give NBA teams an extra year of information and ability to evaluate prospects. And the logic seems sound. After all, it stands to reason that more information can't be a bad thing.

But then we look at the facts. Since the 2005 age-limit rule went into effect that essentially forced players to wait a year following high school -- most often playing one season in college -- NBA teams have been twice as likely to draft a sophomore bust than a freshman, one-and-done bust. Turns out there are more Flynns than Anthony Bennetts. Not only that, but there are more Kevin Durants (stars who left as freshman) than there are Russell Westbrooks (stars who left as sophomores).

If one-and-dones have been the far safer bet, then why are we trying to keep them out?


If you have the full article, it would be much appreciated.

[ZenMaster]

I don't have the full article here, but you are incorrect

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10594203/nba-making-case-one-done-players





If you have the full article, it would be much appreciated.

That's because the reason they come out as one & dones in the first place is because they're generally more talented than those who stay a 2nd year. If they changed it to two years you'd have the same correlation except the discussion would be between sophmores and juniors and the sophmores "would be the safer bet".

Doesn't change the fact that Anthony Davis would have had an even better rookie season had he been forced to stay a 2nd year.

[Sarcastic]

That's because the reason they come out as one & dones in the first place is because they're generally more talented than those who stay a 2nd year. If they changed it to two years you'd have the same correlation except the discussion would be between sophmores and juniors and the sophmores "would be the safer bet".

Doesn't change the fact that Anthony Davis would have had an even better rookie season had he been forced to stay a 2nd year.


He'd be even better if he came in at 24 too.

[ZenMaster]

He'd be even better if he came in at 24 too.

I don't think that's a good argument, it's just too drastic.

There's a curve for players when moving from youth to senior basketball, and a lot of things play in.

Too many of these one & done players have the "need to put on muscle/fill out their frames" in their scouting report for their rookie season and it's simply because they aren't fully grown yet.


''There has to be a balance in terms of the economic opportunity and us putting the best product on the floor in the NBA. It's awfully risky to use your first pick on someone with limited experience in college and, to me, the right balance would be two years.'' - Adam Silver

See how he talks about balance, forcing them to be 24 is too far away from that.
Also, at 24 you're drastically changing their development and possibilites to live up to their original potential, two years in college doesn't do that.

The added bonus for basketball fans is that the college level would be much better as well.

[kaiteng]

Won't be surprised if he drops to Raptors.

[Thorpesaurous]

ON ENNIS:

I've said this before, I'm a Syracuse fan, so I'm a bit predisposed to liking him.
I think physically he's just a bit too limited to be a star, but in the right setting he could be a starter on a championship level team. And now I'm going to compare him to a star, but he reminds me a bit of Tony Parker. The multiple finishing ability at the rim in spite of non-elite athleticism is unusual, and almost impossible to predict. And the almost savant manner in which he handles the PnR. Combined with very good outside shooting. Most scouting websites say he's a go under the PnR type guy, but that's just not what I saw. I by no means think he'll be Parker, but there are some similarities. He would be a nice option on a team that has a ball dominant wing too, because he can space the floor some, and you can run him as a PnR specialist as opposed to having him orchestrate the whole offense. He'd be ideal next to someone like Westbrook. Or in Miami.

ON THE AGE LIMIT.
I agree that the way the data is being presented isn't really a compelling argument. One and Done guys picked super high are exceptionally talented and are going to look good. But adding the extra year of scouting has eliminated a lot of the scouting issues that the straight from HS crowd created.
I love college basketball. But I also don't think it's the ideal for developing NBA players. I think the NBA would benefit from blowing out their NBDL. Allowing prospects to enter that league straight from HS, and putting an age limit at that point. Those players should be paid, on a lesser scale. It would centralize the scouting. Seasons should be longer than what College provides, because it help snuff out the injury bug. A player may be designed to play a HS or College season, but an 82 NBA season is such a different animal it's absurd. Lengthen the game to NBA lenth. Include the same rule set. Just generally limit the amount of variables as much as possible. And I think it could be profitable. It could provide fodder for their network at a capped cost by severely restricting the pay rate. And based on the success of expanded HS and HS all-star game coverage, and the existence of websites like this or DraftNet or whatever, to me explain that there's be a market, even if it were limited. Players get paid. Ownership gets to expand it's knowledge base before making multimillion dollar decisions on kids. It's a win win.
Company's do have a right to issue hiring standards. Age is tricky, because I can't have my job without my degree, but there's nothing saying I couldn't be Doogie Houser and have completed it at 14. But in this business we're talking about an assessment of phyical maturity, so it's got some basis in logic.

[rightsideup]

He's basically another Cory Joseph.An NBA champion???????

[JtotheIzzo]

another Cory Joseph? That is racist...lol

He has some star qualities, he led the FIBA under 19 tournament in scoring (20.9ppg) and was the top rated freshman according to our boy Chad Ford in January.

Freakish athleticism can be overrated, heady point guards tend to stick around. he will be fine.