Reply With Quote
Kobe has lost it
"I'm very, very fond of him," Bryant said. "He's a very skilled, all-around player. I think he's going to have a very bright future in this league. He reminds me of a more talented Jeff Hornacek. Jeff couldn't put the ball on the floor as well as (Hayward) can."
Exhibit 4,375 of why NBA players do not make good scouts/evaluators of talent.
Kobe's always been a real humble interview guy in regards to other players
I still think Hayward is a in moron for leaving Butler last year, if he's there this year they easily beat UCONN in that national le game game (with a much easier road getting there), and he's still a top 10 pick in a very weak draft.
Oh, and the Hornacek reference makes no sense. Hayward is a very athletic guy with a good (not great) shot who's better with the ball in his hands. Hornacek was a stud catch and shoot threat who scored off the dime mostly.
Never give your talent away.
I'm really surprised that a class action hasn't been attempted thru the years to end college's hold on the employment of individuals. I'm sure there is a gentlemen's agreement in place.
This was a shot at clutch kobe
With Hayward, Butler would've beaten UConn I think...The dude will be a 12-16 ppg scorer and somewhere between a 3-5 assist kind of guy. Not necessarily a superstar, but he's not going to be that bad in the Jazz situation.
Cully strikes me as someone who thinks colleges are terrible places promoting a communist agenda.
Jeff Hornacek? What the ?
I think he's more willing to get at it than Sczerbiak. Last night he wasn't afraid to go amongst Bynum and Odom (Gasol is reverting to softy made status). The hustle and effort with etch out a solid, not spectacular, career for the Stuart lookalike.
No. They have a sweetheart deal stealing talented days/months/years from a young person's finite supply. A wink & a nod twixt them & the employer (professional sports teams) is conspiracy & a criminal act.
Never, ever, ever, give your talent away, no matter it's presentation.
What kind of nonsensical garbage is this?
That's compulsory. Westinghouse doesn't require that "I" go to college for one year if "my" genius can move their stock. The NBA, in collusion with the NCAA decrees "me" to give them 1 year of a finite supply of my "genius."
Corporations and companies that are private en ies can set whatever precedent they want for employment. The NBA doesn't even decree they go to college, the specific wording is something like "1 year past high school". It's not like the NBA is the one business in the world that requires some kind of post high school experience/employment.
And you're wrong about the NCAA liking the 1 year rule. The NCAA hates the 1 year rule. Several famous coaches (such as Bob Knight) have vehemently complained about it and have called it a tragedy that the NCAA has yet to do anything about letting the NBA dictate how their league is run. Most NCAA fans (me included) hate the rule. The guys like Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose who could have just as easily skipped college never win anything, all they do is dominate for a year and then lose to an experienced team in March. If it were up to the NCAA, the 1 year rule would be gone.
Good luck convincing him of anything.
Cue Culburn's "nu uh, I ain't buying it".
^Especially since the 1 and done guys are the ones who create nearly all the improper benefit/eligibility investigations for the NCAA to deal with. The 1 year rule has created more of a mess than added attention for the NCAA.
Though the NBA is one business that does require a year in college for participation. The NCAA is in bed with the NBA as they drain that one year of talent at no cost nor risk for themselves. The player is not getting paid and is risking his entire future earnings with no protection. It's legalized theft.
Giving away one year of talent is gross.
It's a cash cow, DUNCAN. There is no risk to the employer (NCAA).
"I" can be POTUS at birth on American soil. But, "I" can't play in the NBA till "I" hand them a % of my fixed talent.
It's unconsionable.
They don't require a year of college. They require a year out of high school. The player can just as easily go to Europe for a year where he would be paid. I can give you an example of this if you wish (Brandon Jennings).
And as I said, guys like Wall and Rose playing 1 year of college does nothing for the NCAA. Scott Drew and John Calipari are maybe the two college coaches who like the rule.
Lute Olson, after the Jennings fiasco, talked about how impossible it is dealing with the 1 and done recruits and said he'd never deal with them again as they are all about themselves.
Why do you think Coach K. never recruits marquee, 1 and done talent? He has no interest in having someone who's gonna work out at Duke for a year, never really be part of the team, then go to the NBA.
The list goes on with coaches who avoid 1 and done talent like the plague. The NCAA hates dealing with it, they'd prefer guys like Rose, Cousins or most of Baylor's recruits go to the NBA than give them a recruiting process that needs to be investigated and sanctioned.
1) You can't be POTUS till you're 35 years old, that's a lot more than the "1 year out of high school" NBA requirement.
2) You don't have to hand the NCAA 1 year of talent. I've already explained this.
3) Technically, you're right I guess that you don't need college to run for president, but good luck getting elected.
The entire premise of your argument is that the NBA requires players go to college for a 1 year which isn't true.
The NCAA and individual coaches are at polar extremes. They're mutally exclusive.
Requiring that they sit out is a red herring. "They" know the vast lion's share of kids will metriculate for at least that one year, and they're risking nothing for that year, hoping that the kid will extend a year or more at a time.
I can sell widgets without sitting out a year.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
