The topic: The age limit for the NBA. A good thing? or a bad thing?
who: big and smith vs. ahsan and madsen35
A reminder that those people I listed above are the only ones who can reply in this thread.. Any other replies will be deleted...

So I think I'll get started... I really hope Smith's views on this topic are the same as mine :)

The age limit is a very good thing. Players coming out of high school are going to think they're ready for the NBA, because their family, their friends, and even their agent will have hyped them up so much, that even if they aren't NBA-ready, they will still be alot more willing to enter the draft.
Now, when you first think of high school players, who comes to mind? Kevin Garnett? Kobe Bryant? Tracy McGrady? Lebron James? All of which are success stories. People, when discussing the issue of early entry, tend to focus on the success stories, rather than the failures. What I'm going to do now is give some examples of the failure of jumping straight to the pros from high school.

Jermaine O'Neal. Drafted in '96 with the 17th pick, by Portland straight out of high school. In his first four seasons in the NBA, O'Neal only played in a total of 211 games, starting 18 of those. But when he was traded to Indiana in 2000, he really started to blossom into an NBA star. Now, don't you think that it would be been alot better if O'Neal had went to college and learned the finer points of the game there, instead of learning it the hard way in Portland? It look him four years to really get acclaimated with NBA life before he really started to get good. Now, if he had stayed in College for two years, he could have started his NBA career alot better.

Kwame Brown. Drafted in 2001 with the first overall pick, by Washington, also came straight out of high school into the NBA. And as of right now, I think Washington is still regretting picking him with the overall number one. He has not lived up to his expectations. Sure, alot of that had to do with Michael Jordan picking back up his playing career around that time, but Kwame has not been able to find his niche, or so to say, in the league at all yet, and he's been playing for four years already. If he had stayed back, and went to college for one or two years, I can guarantee you that the transition to the NBA would have been much easier for him.

Ndudi Ebi. Drafted in 2003 with the 26th overall pick, by Minnesota, came straight out of high school. This was a very unwise decision on Ndudi's part. First of all, did you see this kid when he came out of high school? He was as skinny as a stick, and looked more like he belonged on a high school JV team rather than the Timberwolves squad. I'm not trying to knock the kid, because he has an incredible amount of talent, but he wasn't ready for the NBA. For pete's sake, he's only played in a total of 19 NBA games in two years, and hopefully, this year, he will finally start to get more playing time. But just think about it for a moment. If he had gone to college for say, two years, and entered this year's draft, imagine how much higher of a pick he would have gone for. He would have been drafted much higher, and would have gotten substancial playing time with whatever organization drafted him.

Let's face it. College can only help. It can't hurt anything. In this era, there is really only one player who I think was fully ready for the NBA coming out of high school was Lebron James. He had the body for the NBA, he had the mind for the NBA, and he even had the heard that was for the NBA. This kid was ready. Even looking back on Kevin Garnett, he was just a twig coming out of high school. If he had stuck around and went to college for a year or so, he could have been much more ready for the NBA when he did enter the draft. But then again, if he had went to college, the Wolves probably could have never had a shot at drafting him.

College is just such an invaluable experience to a basketball player. There are only a handful of players out there that might be ready for the jump straight from high school to the NBA. And that handful of players cannot compare to the other high school players who enter the draft, and then fizzle out, and are now stuck playing in Europe, or in the NBDL. Yes, college truly is an invaluable experience. This new age limit that pretty much bans high school graduates from making the jump directly to the NBA is a good thing.

I'll be looking forward to hearing a rebuttal.

I'm just going to keep going with what Samuel said.

The new age limit is going to boost the college basketball world to another level. Everyone is so excited when March Madness comes around anyway, now think if we can throw some stars into the mix. How good would rating have been to see Bryant and Iverson or James and Anthony playing in college against each other. So point one, it helps the popularity of the game for the average fan.

Now, it also helps the college game in other ways. It really makes schools go out and scout kids. It would be pointless to waste time and go and scout a high school phenom if he was going to the League anyway. It will make the large schools (Duke, North Carolina, Connecticut) really compete to sign the top recruits.

The last point of help, it gets the players much more ready for the League. No offense to high school coaches, but they don't know what they're talking about. Think about this, would it be the same if you went from your high school coach to Phil Jackson? That would be a bit dramatic. But if you went from Roy Williams to Larry Brown, it wouldn't seem so bad. Also, players can learn if they are ready for the League. It's really not impressive if you can drop forty points on a team of short white kids. When you go to the College Level, you are playing with the best of your age. Think what a year of College could have done for DeShawn Stevenson, Ndudi Ebi, Kwame Brown and so on.

Now, as to why it hurts things.

With high schoolers having free will as to where they are going, it can really screw a college team over. For example, Shaun Livington said he was going to Duke, great! Then, when the Draft Deadline came around, he said he's going to the Draft. Now Duke is screwed, they didn't bother going out and getting a point guard. Luckily, Daniel Ewing stepped in and did a fine job. The same thing with guys like Sebastian Telfair who said he was going to Louisville. It just keeps the Colleges guessing, and can end of kicking them in the ass.

I'm done for now, I'll wait to see what happens.

Right on, Smith!


I really liked how you included the aspect of how the college game could be improved because of this age limit..


I think we've got ahsan and madsen35 LICKED... :P

So do me and AHsan have to take different stances on this issue than you guys?

What if I were to agree with you two?

That's always the hardest part about these debate games. Both people tend to feel the same way on certain issues....

Unless you've got a really controversial topic, these debate games never really work... You can't just tell people to start debating... It's gotta happen naturally through a thread started innocently enough....

This game is a farce... but the "If you were a GM" game is doing alot better

Alright fine. Even though I somewhat agree with what both of you said, I will post my argument on why the age limit is bad for the game.

First off, who are the top 5 players in the game in terms of fan favorites and most marketable? Well, I believe they are: Shaq, Iverson, Kobe, Lebron, KG.

Now, of those top-5 tier players, 3 of them went to the NBA straight out of high school. Kevin Garnett already has 1 MVP and led his team to the Western Conference Finals. Kobe Bryant has been compared to Micheal Jordan, and Lebron James is putting up great stats in only his first two years.

KG, Kobe, and Lebron have all brought in thousands of dollars to the NBA. They each draw millions of people watch them because they are phenominal. Each has endorsements, which bring in even more money.

Now what if you were to take away those 3 players? I think the NBA would lose alot of money and alot of fans. Millions of kids around the world look up to KG, Kobe, and Lebron because they want to be like them.

Let's not forget such players as Amare Stoudamire, who showed flashes of brilliance against Tim Duncan (2 time MVP) and is bound for stardom. Martell Webster and Gerald Green, who was just drafted, have been compared to T-mac. Al Jefferson, who came straight out of high school, plays for the Boston Celtics and has logged significant minutes even in the playoffs.

Like Jermaine O'neal said, "if I can be drafted to fight a war at age 18, I should be able to play basketball for 48 minutes." This is America. People should have the right to choose if they want to play basketball as a living. If they don't make it, then tough. They chose to go that route. There is always the NBDL or international basketball to fall back on.

Some of these players depend on the NBA to provide income for their families. Some come from poor backgrounds and live in dangerous neighborhoods, so wouldn't it be nice for them to move out of there?

Granted, there are many players who don't pan out in the NBA and will never live up to expectations. But there are more who exceed expectations and become instant superstars.

Bottom line: If the NBA puts an age limit into effect, it is essentially losing some VERY good players, and even more money and fans. And I don't think David Stern would want that..

Here's hoping ahsan doesn't screw this up! ;).

How does the age limit make us lose these very good high school phenoms? All this age limit does is force high school phenoms go to college for ONE YEAR.

There has only been one high school player that should have gone straight to the NBA, and that is Lebron James. He has the body, mind, and heart for the game. He made the transition easily. But then look at players like Ndudi ebi, who shit around for a couple of years because their bodies aren't NBA-ready, when they could have spent that time playing in college, honing their skills.

Like I said before, we don't lose anything. It just prolongs some of these players coming into the league a few years. And anyway, was Kevin Garnett drawing in millions of dollars in endorsements when he first came into the league as a stick sized kid who couldn't shoot?

First off, Ndudi Ebi came to a stacked T-wolves team and was playing behind KG and Wally. If given time, he could be decent.

2nd, when players come straight out of high school there is more hype around them. More people tune in to watch them and they pay attention to the NBA more. When more people watch the NBA, the NBA gets more money.

Lastly, whose jerseys do you see fans wearing? I've seen alot of Kobe's, Lebrons, KGs, even Amare jerseys.

When they come straight from high school, more people are interested in how they turn out.

Did you see this kid when he came out of high school? He didn't even weigh 200 pounds! He didn't play very good off the ball defense, and he needed to bulk up considerably if he ever wanted to get good. Now, this is the perfect example of why the age limit is in place. Ebi made an unwise decision. If a high school player isn't drafted in the lottery, chances are, he is going to flounder. Ebi was drafted 26th, I believe. The time he wasted sitting on the bench could have been spent bulking up and getting valuable experience in college.

That may be true, but they give good players coming out of college just as much hype. How bout Dwyane Wade? He received plenty of hype, and he was NBA ready, because he went to college and honed his skills.

People will be just as interested in them when they come out of college after a year or two with stronger bodies, and a better mind for the game.

Big - I actually agree with you on some parts, but this is a debate game. Even if I agree with you I have to go against you and post my argument...

Well, your agrument is alot like a bathtub i had in an older house.... It doesn't hold an water... heh heh...

I think this argument is pretty pointless, since we both agree on it...

But with you being a Laker fan, and me being a Timberwolf fan, I'm sure we could try to get into that..



Who would you rather have on your team, Kobe, or KG? Seeing as how you get to watch many more Laker games than I do, you could probably provide some valuable insight... I'll try my best to take the other side you didn't take..

I would rather have Kobe on my team, because he makes it fun to watch and still plays with skill. He isn't just all dunks and flash. He has the entire package: shooting, (underrated) passing, rebounding, and what separates him from others is that he can play defense! When he needs to be a playmaker, he can get a triple double. When the team needs scoring, he will provide it. His defense has slipped a bit, but he still disrupts the other teams.

Let's compare Kobe and KG:

Scoring: Kobe
Passing: Kobe
Handles: Kobe
Speed: Kobe
Hops: Kobe, but KG has good hops too
Rebounding: KG
Blocking: KG
Steals: Kobe
FG %: KG
3 pt %: Kobe
FT %: Kobe not by much
Clutchness: Kobe

Kobe takes it in 9 out of 12 categories. He is just as complete of a player as KG, and is funner to watch as well.

Kobe has set numerous records and while he hasn't won an MVP yet, he is reunited with Phil Jackson and has a re-tooled roster. Remember, he has 3 titles and was a big reason the Lakers were succesful during their dynasty years.

KG is great, but he hasn't come up big on the NBA's biggest stage, and is infamous for those losses in the 1st round of the playoffs for all those years. He had a good roster this past season, but still failed to make it to the playoffs.

Kobe on the other hand, had a mediocre, decent at best roster and was in position to make the playoffs until injuries and a coaching change occurred.

Bottom line: Even Micheal Jordan, Phil Jackson, Kobe's biggest hater Shaq, and others have said that Kobe could end up being as good or better than MJ. When people say that, you know you are good.

First of all, where's the total defensive category? Kg would definitely win that one.

Without Shaq, Kobe wouldn't have those three rings. But the same can probably be said for Shaq. That's why I don't like the rings. A championship is based on the entire team, not just one player. Hell, without his supporting cast, and Scottie Pippen, Jordan wouldn't have won as many championships. It's all about the team, baby.

Don't put all the blame on KG's shoulders. As much as I'd like to say that, I really can't. Since KG is the superstar of the team, he's obviously going to be blamed for the good, and praised for the bad. But Cassell and Sprewell had contract problems, and at numerous times in the season, the team had to deal with big attitude problems with both of them.

It doesn't matter if he was close to making the playoffs or not. When people look back at this season, they'll see teams like the Wolves and the Lakers, and then they'll see teams like Altanta, and New Orleans, who were doomed from the start of the season. But it doesn't matter who was close, and who was far away. The fact remains, you're not in the playoffs, whether you're the Wolves, Lakers, or Hawks.

Many of your categories are very deceiving as well.

Granted, Kobe will get more steals, as he is a perimiter player, but you've also got to remember that steals are a sign of a defender who reaches. In order to steal the ball, one of two things has to happen: The ball handler has to lose control of the ball, or the defender has to reach in... Or a combination of the two.

Even though I have to agree with you on this one, KG has had his moments too. Remember those three pointers in Sacramento last year to win the game at the end? That was clutch. But Kobe's moments far outweigh KG's, in this department.


Personally, I would rather have KG on my team. He truly is the entire package, something you can't say the same for Kobe. KG can play every single position on the floor, something Kobe also can't do. What separates KG from Kobe is the rebounding. KG can rebound. That's something so valuable, especially when rebounding, quality big men are so hard to find in this league. Kg could be your point guard. Yet, he could also be your center. I love his versatility.

Oh, and did I mention that KG has a great work ethic, great attitude, and gets along well with his teammates, for the most part. I can guarantee you that KG wouldn't have drove Shaq out of town if they were teammates. If anything, KG doesn't score enough. He's an excellent passer. In fact, he strives to pass. Even though there are times when I wish he could take it to the hole more, you still can't help but appreciate his willingness to share the ball.

I'm not saying that KG is a better player than Kobe, because that's a really hard topic to debate, considering that they are both very good in their respective categories, but I would still rather have KG on my team. The team player, the rebounder, the scorer, the passer, the player with the work ethic. KG has it all.

Kobe has tremendous work ethic as well.

Just because Kobe may have tremendous work ethic, as you call it, but that still doesn't mean he's as complete as a package as KG is...

Aren't you going to respond to my post with anything more than just a one liner?

...................






AHsan, are you going to help Madsen35?

Kevin Garnett has a great work ethic too, one of the best in the league. Not to mention he is a big man who protects the paint but he can also play the perimeter. Sure, Kobe has better handles but KG has great handles for his size and position.

Sorry, I had to post that. Even though I'm not in the game I can't help but comment on some of these debates. :P

I think I'm gonna allow you to post your thoughts in this debate, sealy... :D

Kobe probably has more talent than KG, but KG (7 footer with all-around skills) is harder to come by. It's a pointless debate. I am a Laker fan, you are Wolve fans, so we aren't going to agree on this.

I personally think that Kobe is a better player and is funner to watch.

Most debates are....

They're both very good players, and the subject of who you would rather have on your team is very debateable...


We should seriously start to brainstorm ideas for round two... I think it would be a better idea if we left this debate open to the public, instead of just four people...

Just is just an idea, but the Wolves/Mavs thread when Waqas was here was always a hot topic. Why not have the debates player/player type? Like who is better Vince Carter or Tracy McGrady? Things like that and see where they go from there.