What I do see in this age limit is the league exploiting young men because they are lazy and incompetent. First of all, this age limit forces players to donate a year of their lives to playing for the NCAA. Though they usually receive free tuition from the schools that recruit them and a healthy amount of exposure in the process, prospects are sacrificing a year of pro salary and risking serious injury every time they take the floor for their schools. The schools, the NCAA and CBS all make a killing off of these young men and give them minimal compensation in return. It isn't quite slavery (after all they DO receive something in exchange for their services), but in many ways this system is very close to indentured servitude. The schools presumably feed, clothe and "educate" the young men in exchange for their hard work at what appears to me as an appallingly unfair rate.
Secondly, the NBA's current age limit creates a huge double standard for incoming talent by forcing American teenagers to wait a year before entering the draft while talented youngsters from Europe and elsewhere are allowed into the draft regardless of their age. For example, Spain's Ricky Rubio will be one of the top prospects in this year's draft (likely going second or third overall) despite the fact that he doesn't turn 19 until the end of October 2009. By contrast, point guard sensation Brandon Jennings was not allowed to enter into the 2008 Draft directly out of high school (choosing instead to play professionally in Europe instead of going to college) because of this rule even though his age situation is almost exactly the same as Rubio's (Jennings was born in September of 1989, Rubio was born in October of 1990). Though Jennings got paid for his year in Europe, his stock has fallen from being a potential top three pick last year to being a late lottery pick with some question marks this year. This will end up costing him millions of dollars immediately and perhaps throughout his entire career in the NBA, while Rubio will essentially be following the path Jennings would have and will be handsomely rewarded for it by the NBA.
So why does Ricky Rubio get to play before he's 19 and many young stars-to-be like Brandon Jennings have to wait? Aside form the exploitation and the money tied up in college ball and the interests of the NCAA etc. etc., the dirty truth is that most NBA scouts and GMs are so horrible and inept at judging basketball prospects that they need to send all of these boys to college to have even a slight chance of accurately evaluating them. The competition that these young men play against in high school is so uneven and unpredictable that it can make it harder to get an accurate picture of their abilities as a player, whereas in the NCAA, the competition is easier to judge and generally holds to a certain standard (games are also more often televised, which cuts down on the need to send scouts out to random gyms across the country). By pitting these prospects against tougher, more standardized competition, it becomes much easier for scouts and GMs to make informed decisions about a player's strengths, weaknesses and potential.
Why else would there be an age limit if not for this benefit? I can't honestly believe that Stern thinks these kids are actually getting any kind of real education in one year at college which has become simply an extended pro tryout, nor do I believe that he sees this program as a way to make players more mature (anyone heard of Michael Beasley?). No, Stern and the owners and executives did this to make their jobs easier. Because NBA teams were having trouble telling the difference between Josh Smith and Gerald Green, they came up with a stupid rule (in classic NBA fashion) that solves the problem on their end without addressing the real issues at hand. Heaven forbid that the scouts and GMs across the NBA develop better methods for evaluating high schoolers or put more time and energy into dissecting the potential flaws of a player from high school, no that simply wouldn't do. Instead, the league chooses to punish the players by robbing them of salary to solve the problem.
But other sports have age limits, so why not basketball? Sure, football has an age limit because if they let 18 year-olds onto an NFL field with Julius Peppers or Ray Lewis they'd get killed, plain and simple. An age limit makes sense there, but not in the NBA where players as young as 18 and 19 can not only hold their own against veterans but dominate a game. Even in sports with considerably more contact than basketball, 18 year-olds fresh out of high school are allowed to compete at the highest level as long as they're ready to do so (does the name Sydney Crosby ring a bell?). Baseball takes players straight out of high school, and although most spend years in the minor leagues developing their skills, those who are ready to play immediately are not prevented from doing so. The only sane reason to put an age limit on professional sports is to protect the players from the level of competition they face. The NBA says this is the reason for their ban on high schoolers, but really they're doing it to cover their own asses.
To me, it's as plain as day that the NBA panicked and instated this ludicrous rule because they were either too stupid or too unwilling to take the bull by the horns and work hard on evaluating these high school players. Instead of using discretion when it came to evaluating high school players, NBA GMs and scouts went crazy and thought that every high school phenom would be the next KG or Kobe. Discretion, judgement and common sense went out the window and then players like Sebastian Telfair, Gerald Green, Eddy Curry, Kwame Brown and Darius Miles were taken way too soon and suddenly all hell breaks loose. I'm not about to say that any of these guys belonged in the NBA right out of high school, but what I will say to the death is that it isn't their fault that NBA teams were too stupid or too blind to see their flaws. The onus for giving contracts to players has to fall on the teams and the executives who are paid handsomely to do just that, shifting the burden onto the players is simply outrageous.
And while we're at it, I don't buy for one minute the argument that sending players to college for ONE YEAR makes them more mature human beings or more productive members of society, the evidence simply doesn't support that. For every head case from high school that could have used a year or two of college (think of the names from the previous paragraph as a good starting point), there are also a slew of NBA players who were very successful in their transition from high school to the NBA. Want names? How about LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Rashard Lewis, Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Tyson Chandler, Andrew Bynum, Travis Outlaw, Al Jefferson, Kendrick Perkins, Al Harrington, Josh Smith, Jermaine O'Neal, Amare Stoudemire and Moses Malone (all off the top of my head) just to name a few. And beyond that, I could probably come up with a list of players who went to college and still turned out to be busts or head cases or worse (think Ron Artest, J.R. Rider, Zach Randolph, Dennis Rodman etc.). College does not equal maturity, nor does it always equal an education. There is no proof that I'm aware of that shows that college players are better humans than high schoolers or that college players do better in the pros than high schoolers do.
I'm not advocating that every prospective pro player declare for the draft right out of high school, because most of them simply aren't ready for the NBA. Most players could use at least two seasons of college to learn and refine their game before making the difficult leap to the pros, but I don't see that as a good reason to bar ALL high school athletes from making the jump. Some basketball players are physically and mentally ready for the NBA straight out of high school, and forcing them to sacrifice millions of dollars is a crime. Sometimes I can't help but wonder if Stern and the NBA did any research at all before making this inane decision, but then I remember that this is the NBA and that stuff like this happens in all arenas of the pro game all the time. A difficult solution exists (scout better, draft high schoolers with caution) but the league opts for the solution that's easiest for them but skirts the real issue.
So how valuable is a year of college for these basketball players? I think it has some value but not nearly as much as a contract in the NBA does. These young men are being unjustly forced to sacrifice their bodies for a system that makes millions off of them and provides them with very little in return. Though the age limit was implemented to supposedly help players make the tough journey to the NBA and provide them with greater opportunities for success, in truth it does little more than shield the suits running the teams. If this doesn't seem crazy or wrong to anyone else, let me know and I will check myself into a hospital. Until then, I'm going to watch game one of the Finals, which will feature two high school superstars in Kobe Bryant and Dwight Howard, and drink until my brain can't fathom this egregious and ridiculous hypocrisy.
