Comparing draft of basketball and football

joseph jeong wrote:
> Jason Bell <Jason_Bell RemoveThis @mail.com> hypothesized the following:
>
> :> Agreed! The sooner the NBA realizes that they are just watering down their
> :> own product by allowing high schoolers and one year wonders to join their
> :> ranks, the sooner they'll start singing the same tune.
> :
> : Hey to the rookie of the year, no college experience.
> : Hey to the runner up, one year of college experience.
>
> hey to Kwame Brown. hey to a whole bunch of other high school busts.
> i'll see your two and raise you a whole bunch more. are you going to
> call with your Moses Malone?

I need not. The rookie of the year and the runner
up are a perfectly sufficient argument that high
schoolers and one-year collegians should not be
*banned* from joining the NBA.

Whether there are many players who should not
make such a jump is another argument. The
mechanism by which a player should be judged
to be ready for the NBA yet another. It was
relatively clear that LeBron would be able to
play at the NBA level (though he has played
at a level almost as high as the hype which
preceeded him), and anyone who saw his
McD AA game would have said Amare was ready,
at least physically, and he was.

The issue at hand was whether the NBA would ever
come to their senses and impose a ban similar to
that of the NFL.

My observation is that expansion and free agency
have crippled the possibility of parity in the
NBA, creating situations where bad teams are willing
to throw inexperienced but talented youngsters
on a court to lose games and get better.

Thus it is not surprising that Detroit, which
acquired the two pick despite the best record
in the East in the previous year, chose to
develop Darko in practice and garbage time
instead of say, Toronto (third worst record
in the East), who let Bosh (fourth pick)
develop on the court

- Jason Bell
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

Donnie Barnes wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Apr, George W Harris wrote:
>
>>:You have a better way to measure physical maturity?
>>
>> Case-by-case basis. If a prospect doesn't
>>have the physical maturity to play in the NFL, then
>>no teams should be interested in him. If a team thinks
>>he does, then they should be allowed to sign him and
>>he should be allowed to play.
>
>
> It isn't about how fast you run the 40 or how much you can bench press.
> It's about how your body can handle the rigors of the game.
>
> Kids out of high school have played just a few years at *that* level, and
> that level has lighter hits, slower players, and a much shorter season.
> Currently to play in the NFL you now need to pretty much play three seasons
> in college, which exposes you to a higher level of hitting, a higher level
> of speed, and a longer season and does so over several years. Just
> because a guy is "big and strong" coming out of high school doesn't
> mean he's had the experience that *truly* builds his body.
>
> If you guys think this isn't a big deal, well, you're just plain wrong.

Why u gotta be so sanctimonious, Donnie?

[dive for cover]

- Jason Bell
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

Jason Bell <Jason_Bell.RemoveThis@mail.com> hypothesized the following:
:
:
: joseph jeong wrote:
:> Jason Bell <Jason_Bell.RemoveThis@mail.com> hypothesized the following:
:>
:> :> Agreed! The sooner the NBA realizes that they are just watering down their
:> :> own product by allowing high schoolers and one year wonders to join their
:> :> ranks, the sooner they'll start singing the same tune.
:> :
:> : Hey to the rookie of the year, no college experience.
:> : Hey to the runner up, one year of college experience.
:>
:> hey to Kwame Brown. hey to a whole bunch of other high school busts.
:> i'll see your two and raise you a whole bunch more. are you going to
:> call with your Moses Malone?
:
: I need not. The rookie of the year and the runner
: up are a perfectly sufficient argument that high
: schoolers and one-year collegians should not be
: *banned* from joining the NBA.

1) i was responding to the dilution part of the argument.

2) again, as Seriff pointed out, there is no "right" to play in the NBA.
if you have the basketball skills in the NBA, but for some reason or
another no NBA team wants to offer you a contract, then that's tough
luck for you. so if they choose to say, we don't want any high
schoolers, that's their perogative, regardless of how LeBron did. so no,
LeBron and Carmelo aren't perfectly sufficient arguments.





-joseph
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

In article <slrnc93buj.34k.joseph.RemoveThis@ae-39-44.ae.gatech.edu>,
joseph jeong <joseph.RemoveThis@thisisvalid.polter.net> wrote:

> 2) again, as Seriff pointed out, there is no "right" to play in the NBA.
> if you have the basketball skills in the NBA, but for some reason or
> another no NBA team wants to offer you a contract, then that's tough
> luck for you. so if they choose to say, we don't want any high
> schoolers, that's their perogative, regardless of how LeBron did. so no,
> LeBron and Carmelo aren't perfectly sufficient arguments.

Sure, there's no right to play in the NBA, and teams shouldn't offer
you a contract if they don't want to. But my argument at least (can't
speak for anyone else) is that if a team thinks high schoolers won't
help, then don't draft them. If you think they are good enough to
play, then draft them. There's no need for any arbitrary restrictions
that are, in any event, imperfect proxies for whatever they're trying
to guard against.

- geoff
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

Explain how MLB signs ballplayers in the Caribbean at age 16, but doesn't in
the US.

Mike


"Harry Everhart" <harry.TakeThisOut@everhart.com> wrote in message
news:harry-C558CC.12431127042004@comcast.ash.giganews.com...
> I do not understand how the legal system allows kids to play pro
> basketball at age 18 but does not allow kids to play pro football at age
> 18.
>
> What legal factor am I missing?
>
> LeBron James can come right out of high school into the draft for the
> NBA and yet Maurice Clarett is denied the same privilege with the NFL.
>
> It seems to me it would be a "slam dunk" for a lawyer to win that case.
>
> Personally - I feel that any draft that does not allow a kid to go work
> wherever he wants - is slavery. Even if they are million dollar slaves -
> their liberty is still being taken away.
>
> In 1970 - I graduated from college with a teaching license - I was
> allowed to apply to teach wheverever I wanted. It would be illegal to
> require me to only be able to teach in one city or town.
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"Daniel Seriff" wrote...
> mc wrote:
> > "Pauli G" wrote...
> >> Daniel Seriff wrote...
> >>> Harry Everhart wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Everyone is dancing around my original question - but not answering it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Here it is again - why can a kid play in the NBA at 18 - but not in the
> >>>> NFL at 18?
> >>>
> >>> Because the NFL has decided that it doesn't want 18 year olds to play in
> >>> the
> >>> NFL. Either you're trying to make this *way* too complex, or you're simply
> >>> ignoring all the perfectly valid reasons that have already been provided
> >>> you.
> >>>
> >>> Given the first sentence of your post just above, I'm guessing it's the
> >>> latter.
> >>>
> >>>> Just tell me what law allows the NFL to restrict kids - but the not NBA.
> >>>
> >>> This question misses the whole point. By a mile, I might add.
> >>
> >> The NFL's stance is that an 18 year old kid out of high school is
> >> simply not physically ready for the pure speed and brutal play of the
> >> NFL, not to mention the long schedule. They want the kids to use
> >> college as a developmental step before jumping to the NFL, hence the
> >> rule.
> >
> > does anyone else besides me think that it's still rooted in money?
>
> Name one thing in human society that *isn't* rooted in money.
>

very true, daniel. sad state of affairs, too.

> The monetary aspect of draft restrictions is a non-issue.
>

i agree that, taken as a singular issue (i.e. draft restrictions), the monetary
aspect is, in theory, a non-issue. but both drafts are a function of their
respective leagues and both leagues are industries that are in the business of
getting teh largest return on their investments as possible. i think at the
very least, money and the draft are indirectly related.

i just believe that if (with "if" being the operative word here, okay?) the nfl
were suffering similar travails as the nba, they might be considering this as a
possibility to draw attention to itself. who of us think that tagliabue isn't
above considering it if they were feeling the nba's pain?

and does anyone think for a moment that a prep football player who wants to
enter the draft is doing it *solely* for the love of the game? who else thinks
he's doing it for the money? that makes the monetary aspect of his declaration
a *very* real issue.

but as it stands, the nfl has an excellent product. consequently, they don't
need to draft guys who want to come out before completing three or four years of
the college game. and i personally take no issue with that.

but, for discussions sake, i wonder what would happen if some anomaly of a prep
player - one who just happened to have the physical attributes to play the
game - surfaces on the i'm-ready-and-i-want-to-enter-the-nfl-draft scene. and
we're talking about the kind of kid who would have all of the experts wagging
there tongues at the prospect. the kind of a kid who would be all over magazine
covers and chronicled repeatedly on espn. sure, it hasn't happened yet, but
what if? would tagliabue and the boys in the board room regroup if they thought
this kid could be a legitimate draw (i.e. more tickets, more jerseys, tv
revenues, blah blah blah) and the league could make more money in the process?

would they then be willing to change the rules or would they think they would be
opening a proverbial pandora's box?
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
>
> "Donnie Barnes" wrote...
> > On Thu, 29 Apr, George W Harris wrote:
> > >:It isn't about how fast you run the 40 or how much you can bench press.
> > >:It's about how your body can handle the rigors of the game.
> > >
> > > I never mentioned running the 40 or bench
> > > pressing. NFL scouts are more thorough than
> > > CIA intelligence analysts, and less frequently wrong.
>
> That's not saying much. I'll agree the scouts do a good
> job, but there's no shortage of first rounders who don't
> make it in the NFL either.
>
> > > Bodies aren't suddenly more durable after the third year
> > > in high school; it varies from person to person, and if a
> > > person has the toughness at 19, let him play.
>
> That would be *my* preference...
>
> > I don't know of any testing they do that tells them how they are going to
> > handle getting crunched by a 270 pound man who runs the 40 faster than
> > 99.9% of the 200 pound men in the world. Of course, they don't *have* to
> > do that, because that generally happens in college for them.
> >
> > There are simply rigors they can't simulate, which is exactly why they have
> > the stinkin rule to begin with.
>
> Football careers are notorious short for a reason.
>
> > That and I'm sure they like having that
> > much more good data to use to scout with.
>
> True, it is much easier to evaluate talent against NCAA
> competition than high school.
>

so what happens if youth football follows the aau route of other sports and
football players begin training at a higher level at a younger age and competing
against better levels of competition?

i'm kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, now that i think about it.
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"mc" <mellowcat.RemoveThis@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:y_skc.60780$Uz1.45104@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
> >
> > "Donnie Barnes" wrote...
> > > On Thu, 29 Apr, George W Harris wrote:
> > > >:It isn't about how fast you run the 40 or how much you can bench press.
> > > >:It's about how your body can handle the rigors of the game.
> > > >
> > > > I never mentioned running the 40 or bench
> > > > pressing. NFL scouts are more thorough than
> > > > CIA intelligence analysts, and less frequently wrong.
> >
> > That's not saying much. I'll agree the scouts do a good
> > job, but there's no shortage of first rounders who don't
> > make it in the NFL either.
> >
> > > > Bodies aren't suddenly more durable after the third year
> > > > in high school; it varies from person to person, and if a
> > > > person has the toughness at 19, let him play.
> >
> > That would be *my* preference...
> >
> > > I don't know of any testing they do that tells them how they are going to
> > > handle getting crunched by a 270 pound man who runs the 40 faster than
> > > 99.9% of the 200 pound men in the world. Of course, they don't *have* to
> > > do that, because that generally happens in college for them.
> > >
> > > There are simply rigors they can't simulate, which is exactly why they have
> > > the stinkin rule to begin with.
> >
> > Football careers are notorious short for a reason.
> >
> > > That and I'm sure they like having that
> > > much more good data to use to scout with.
> >
> > True, it is much easier to evaluate talent against NCAA
> > competition than high school.
> >
>
> so what happens if youth football follows the aau route of other sports and
> football players begin training at a higher level at a younger age and competing
> against better levels of competition?

Nothing.

> i'm kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, now that i think about it.

I think part of the problem is that many of these kids haven't
stopped growing. You just don't get to NFL strength by 18
very often. Certainly better competition might help some more
kids be ready, but I don't know how many that would quality
for the NFL. Even in a small school, I do seem to remember
the serious football atheletes doing weight training all year.

--Ted
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"Daniel Seriff" <microtonal.RemoveThis@nospam.com> wrote :

> >> Name one thing in human society that *isn't* rooted in money.

Some marriages.

> > very true, daniel. sad state of affairs, too.
>
> Eh. It's just the way it is.

People have a natural tendency to create things of value and to
trade them for other things of value, the occaisional deadwood
notwithstanding. I need gin, gin distillers need money...

See Bastiat, Frederick.

--Tedward
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
>
> "mc" wrote...
> >
> > "Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
> > >
> > > "Donnie Barnes" wrote...
> > > > On Thu, 29 Apr, George W Harris wrote:
> > > > >:It isn't about how fast you run the 40 or how much you can bench
press.
> > > > >:It's about how your body can handle the rigors of the game.
> > > > >
> > > > > I never mentioned running the 40 or bench
> > > > > pressing. NFL scouts are more thorough than
> > > > > CIA intelligence analysts, and less frequently wrong.
> > >
> > > That's not saying much. I'll agree the scouts do a good
> > > job, but there's no shortage of first rounders who don't
> > > make it in the NFL either.
> > >
> > > > > Bodies aren't suddenly more durable after the third year
> > > > > in high school; it varies from person to person, and if a
> > > > > person has the toughness at 19, let him play.
> > >
> > > That would be *my* preference...
> > >
> > > > I don't know of any testing they do that tells them how they are going
to
> > > > handle getting crunched by a 270 pound man who runs the 40 faster than
> > > > 99.9% of the 200 pound men in the world. Of course, they don't *have*
to
> > > > do that, because that generally happens in college for them.
> > > >
> > > > There are simply rigors they can't simulate, which is exactly why they
have
> > > > the stinkin rule to begin with.
> > >
> > > Football careers are notorious short for a reason.
> > >
> > > > That and I'm sure they like having that
> > > > much more good data to use to scout with.
> > >
> > > True, it is much easier to evaluate talent against NCAA
> > > competition than high school.
> > >
> >
> > so what happens if youth football follows the aau route of other sports and
> > football players begin training at a higher level at a younger age and
competing
> > against better levels of competition?
>
> Nothing.
>

nothing. nothing? well, as much as i love the idealistic purity of absolute
statements, how can any of us be *so* certain? again, i'm not an advocate of
eighteen year olds going to the nfl. it just seems we are ever so slowly
evolving in that direction, one way or another.

i wonder if the devotees of basketball, back when moses malone turned pro,
thought we would one day see so many high school kids going *so* high in the
draft? some of them, successfully. i know, i know. it's basketball, not
football. but some of the same mentality applies.

> > i'm kinda surprised this hasn't happened already, now that i think about it.
>
> I think part of the problem is that many of these kids haven't
> stopped growing. You just don't get to NFL strength by 18
> very often. Certainly better competition might help some more
> kids be ready, but I don't know how many that would quality
> for the NFL. Even in a small school, I do seem to remember
> the serious football athletes doing weight training all year.
>

agreed. no question that the dynamic involved in the *typical* physiological
development of the football player is significantly different than that of most
other sport's athletes.
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

Daniel Seriff <microtonal DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote:

> I think experience is far more of an issue in football, because it's nowhere
> near as easy for football players to get it as it is for basketball or
> baseball players. You see kids shooting hoops and working the batting cages
> by themselves all the time, but how often do you see a kid alone in a field
> doing trap-block drills?

It's not even a question of that, but of how much individual drills can
help you in an actual football game. A guy can go to the gym and shoot
basketballs by himself until he's totally unconscious from the free
throw line, and could win a 3-point competition, without ever actually
playing against anyone. Assuming you get to "out-of-this-world" level
as a shooter -- if you've also got lots of speed and strength -- Throw
in a city-league/high-school level of tactics and strategy and such a
guy could potentially contribute as a 2 in the right sets in the NBA,
because just plain accurate shooting is *so* important.

Try to do the equivalent for any position in football. Is it *possible*
to learn enough on your own to be anything but dead in the water at NFL
camp if you've never gone up against near-top competition? I seriously
doubt it, because everything you do is about matching up with your
opponent. Wide receiver and running back are the only places where pure
speed would ever be important enough to matter, and that's only *after*
you've made the play to beat your man.

Even baseball, I think is tougher than basketball. You can hack in a
batting cage, but as large as the difference is between hoisting a 3
with Joe city-league in your face, vs. Gary Payton -- I doubt it's
anything like the difference between a batting bot and Curt Schilling.


Michael
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"mc" <mellowcat.DeleteThis@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:9Hwkc.45269$oN1.5968@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
> >
> > "mc" wrote...
> > >
> > > "Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
> > > >
> > > > "Donnie Barnes" wrote...
> > > > > On Thu, 29 Apr, George W Harris wrote:
> > > > > >:It isn't about how fast you run the 40 or how much you can bench
> press.
> > > > > >:It's about how your body can handle the rigors of the game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I never mentioned running the 40 or bench
> > > > > > pressing. NFL scouts are more thorough than
> > > > > > CIA intelligence analysts, and less frequently wrong.
> > > >
> > > > That's not saying much. I'll agree the scouts do a good
> > > > job, but there's no shortage of first rounders who don't
> > > > make it in the NFL either.
> > > >
> > > > > > Bodies aren't suddenly more durable after the third year
> > > > > > in high school; it varies from person to person, and if a
> > > > > > person has the toughness at 19, let him play.
> > > >
> > > > That would be *my* preference...
> > > >
> > > > > I don't know of any testing they do that tells them how they are going
> to
> > > > > handle getting crunched by a 270 pound man who runs the 40 faster than
> > > > > 99.9% of the 200 pound men in the world. Of course, they don't *have*
> to
> > > > > do that, because that generally happens in college for them.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are simply rigors they can't simulate, which is exactly why they
> have
> > > > > the stinkin rule to begin with.
> > > >
> > > > Football careers are notorious short for a reason.
> > > >
> > > > > That and I'm sure they like having that
> > > > > much more good data to use to scout with.
> > > >
> > > > True, it is much easier to evaluate talent against NCAA
> > > > competition than high school.
> > > >
> > >
> > > so what happens if youth football follows the aau route of other sports and
> > > football players begin training at a higher level at a younger age and
> competing
> > > against better levels of competition?
> >
> > Nothing.
>
> nothing. nothing? well, as much as i love the idealistic purity of absolute
> statements, how can any of us be *so* certain? again, i'm not an advocate of
> eighteen year olds going to the nfl. it just seems we are ever so slowly
> evolving in that direction, one way or another.

Football probably already has plenty of camps 'n stuff, but I don't
see AAU football getting off the ground in the way it has for hoops.
For one, the start up costs for football teams is prolly prohibitively
expensive and requires a less common type of arena. I cannot see
the same kind of quick interest as you get with an more individual
sport like basketball in football. Sure, a few folks might come out
to a highly touted quarterback, but all the other players are getting
few touches. And nobody is gonna pay to go see next year's center
or tackle.

--Ted
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football 

"Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
>
> "mc" wrote...
> >
> > "Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
> > >
> > > "mc" wrote...
> > > >
> > > > "Edward M. Kennedy" wrote...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Donnie Barnes" wrote...
> > > > > > On Thu, 29 Apr, George W Harris wrote:
> > > > > > >:It isn't about how fast you run the 40 or how much you can bench
> > press.
> > > > > > >:It's about how your body can handle the rigors of the game.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I never mentioned running the 40 or bench
> > > > > > > pressing. NFL scouts are more thorough than
> > > > > > > CIA intelligence analysts, and less frequently wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > That's not saying much. I'll agree the scouts do a good
> > > > > job, but there's no shortage of first rounders who don't
> > > > > make it in the NFL either.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Bodies aren't suddenly more durable after the third year
> > > > > > > in high school; it varies from person to person, and if a
> > > > > > > person has the toughness at 19, let him play.
> > > > >
> > > > > That would be *my* preference...
> > > > >
> > > > > > I don't know of any testing they do that tells them how they are
going
> > to
> > > > > > handle getting crunched by a 270 pound man who runs the 40 faster
than
> > > > > > 99.9% of the 200 pound men in the world. Of course, they don't
*have*
> > to
> > > > > > do that, because that generally happens in college for them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are simply rigors they can't simulate, which is exactly why
they
> > have
> > > > > > the stinkin rule to begin with.
> > > > >
> > > > > Football careers are notorious short for a reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > > That and I'm sure they like having that
> > > > > > much more good data to use to scout with.
> > > > >
> > > > > True, it is much easier to evaluate talent against NCAA
> > > > > competition than high school.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > so what happens if youth football follows the aau route of other sports
and
> > > > football players begin training at a higher level at a younger age and
> > competing
> > > > against better levels of competition?
> > >
> > > Nothing.
> >
> > nothing. nothing? well, as much as i love the idealistic purity of
absolute
> > statements, how can any of us be *so* certain? again, i'm not an advocate
of
> > eighteen year olds going to the nfl. it just seems we are ever so slowly
> > evolving in that direction, one way or another.
>
> Football probably already has plenty of camps 'n stuff, but I don't
> see AAU football getting off the ground in the way it has for hoops.
> For one, the start up costs for football teams is prolly prohibitively
> expensive and requires a less common type of arena. I cannot see
> the same kind of quick interest as you get with an more individual
> sport like basketball in football. Sure, a few folks might come out
> to a highly touted quarterback, but all the other players are getting
> few touches. And nobody is gonna pay to go see next year's center
> or tackle.
>

i was considering "what happens if..." as opposed to whether or not it would. i
agree that the odds are unlikely that aau football will actually happen. but
two of my sons are currently playing aau/yboa basketball (i'm leaving here in
just a moment to go down to augusta for a national qualifier tourney) and
another plays on a traveling soccer team. anything is possible if enough people
with enough money (there's that word again) want it bad enough.

who was it who said "build it and they will come."?
 >> Stay informed about: Comparing draft of basketball and football