How rookies have fared over the last 4 years

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2011&year_max=2014&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=1&age_min=19&age_max=22&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1100&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=mp

Above stat line is for rookies with a minimum of 1100 minutes in his rookie year which translates to being in a 7 or 8 man rotation. Listed year is the rookie year for the player and his age that year. I wonder how this years crop of rookies will compare.

swish

swish wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2011&year_max=2014&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=1&age_min=19&age_max=22&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1100&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=mp

Above stat line is for rookies with a minimum of 1100 minutes in his rookie year which translates to being in a 7 or 8 man rotation. Listed year is the rookie year for the player and his age that year. I wonder how this years crop of rookies will compare.

swish

swish,

MPG doesn't translate into talent.  Michael Kidd-Gilchrist is ranked #11, as a 19 year old rookie, and is being shopped by Charlotte.  Bradley Beal played a lot for the Wiz in his rookie year only because they stunk.  He's having a better year this year, but still not awesome (he's shooting under 41% for the season), certainly not what you'd expect from a #3 pick.

In fact, if you look at the underclassmen on this list, players who were rookies 19, you'll see a lot of players that should have stayed in school.

The total list of 19 year olds:
Kidd-Gilchrist, Harkless, Anthony Davis, Bradley Beal, Giannis, Kyrie Irving, Derrick Favors, Bismack Biyombo, Andre Drummond.

Of these, Davis and Irving were #1 picks, so they were stellar, franchise cornerstone players.  The rest?  Drummond is the only one that I see that I would say "he made the right decision coming out".  

My observations and conclusion is that the eligibility of one-and-doners has diluted the talent of the NBA.  There's more fear on the part of GMs to be accused of passing on a promising 19 year old than recognizing that they aren't likely to be impact players without getting the years of experience they needed when they were in school. Basketball is not about running fast and jumping high. If it was Larry Bird's career would have ended in High School.

Rumors are that the new Commish is thinking about raising the age limit for draftees a year.   I support that.  Players, especially the young'uns, today might be more athletic than the old days but they are not as good of basketball players as the old-timers.


bob


.

I know that many have commented on it but here it goes again.  Big time college sports by all logic should not exist.


It's a system that lines the pockets of the coaches and schools to say nothing about the media but, with the exception of a few top players, does little for those who generate the income.

It would be a lot less hypocritical if the NBA and NFL goes to a farm system like baseball or a club system like most foreign countries
where the players are openly paid.

Better for the players and better for the sport.

Sloopjohnb

I shed no tears for the "jock". While it sure is a winner for the schools the athlete does pretty darm good also. A free college education worth 100 to 200 thousand dollars ain't too shabby. And for those that opt out early, they choose to roll the dice that they have a future in the NBA.

swish

A free college education is real nice. But judging by the graduation rates at most big time programs its more a theory than a reality.

The money is too big an incentive NOT to declare for the draft. And besides, even college players coming out have to adjust to the learning curve. Sure, staying in school would allow more time for polishing one's game, but I highly doubt any of these players would improve themselves by leaps and bound in college. That's just as unrealistic as a GM expecting that same promising prospect to become an immediate impact/franchise player. Let's look at Evan Turner, former #2 pick behind John Wall in 2010. He's a good, solid player that stayed at Ohio St for 3 years, but is he really significantly better than the marquee players that have come out in the past few years? I don't think he is.



KJ

Sloop and Swish,

College sports aren't what they used to be. They are now multi-billion dollar businesses where coaches sometimes make more than university presidents and are sometimes the highest paid public employees in the state.

Getting a free education at a quality university isn't peanuts, but for most big-time athletic programs, it's a secondary pursuit after the main job of playing a sport. Practice, meetings, training, and other team activities can take 40 hours a week or more. Players at many programs are directed into sports-friendly majors that offer passing grades and little opportunity after the athlete's college career is over.

Recent legal decisions are recognizing this changed landscape, including the Northwestern football players right to form a union because they meet the qualifications of employees and the Ed O'Bannon class action suit allowing college athletes to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness instead of all those proceeds going to either the college or the NCAA (Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, and other former college athletes have joined the suit).

Athletes at many major basketball and football programs are treated like grist for the mill to be case aside if they get injured or don't perform. Meanwhile, coaches, universities, and the NCAA rake in millions.

Considering that universities get millions in additional donations from alumni and supporters when sports programs do well, the cost of scholarships is a small investment that pays off handsomely. It certainly isn't fair compensation for the role these athletes have come to fill. The system they are a part of is professional sports, but the only reason it isn't called that is because the athletes aren't paid.

"Athletes at many major basketball and football programs are treated like grist for the mill to be case aside if they get injured or don't perform. Meanwhile, coaches, universities, and the NCAA rake in millions."

That is the dark side of the gltiz of all too many big time college sports programs. And, oh yes, let's not forget that many of the players never graduate and indeed would never have been admitted but for their athletic skill and potential to make big money for the school.

And of course, the overwhelming majority never crack a pro roster.