No, my argument is more subtle than that. Of course blue blood programs get the most talent, and will ocntinue to do so. the difference is that there used to be some filter down to midlevel Power 5 teams. Now, there barely is. That is the sea change, not Kentucky being more talented.

quote:
Brad Stevens is a hell of a basketball coach. He is getting more out of less talent than most NBA coaches I can ever recall.

He coaches at VCU? George Mason? Wichita St? Pretty amazing job.

quote:
Plus a midmajor sneaking in to the Final Four isn't some new thing. It is single elimination tournament. Teams get hot. Just go through a list of final four teams, more often then not you will see one or two teams that make you go "wut."

It's five mid majors in the past eight years. And that's not even counting C-USA teams, which are borderline majors. Prior to 2006 and George Mason's run, a midmajor team seeded lower than 4th in their bracket (showing a genuine upset run and not Memphis or Utah) made it to the Final Four previously in 1979 (Princeton... Indiana St was a #1 seed, more akin to a UNLV)

quote:
None of them have won it either.

Well, because of a missed buzzer beater, but that's not really the point. The blue bloods are still the blue bloods.

quote:
The one and done rule effect so few number of schools the idea that it has any sort of dramatic effect is ludicrous. There are what maybe 10 one and done guys a year? There are 300+ D1 teams with 13 scholarship players. The NBA takes 60 players in the draft and about 20 of those guys are from overseas. To act like the NBA is having any sort of negative effect is just disingenuous.

Alex Lin was a terrible player for Maryland, but he still left after one year because, well, he is 7 feet tall and the NBA still values big guys. To act like only Kentucky is affected by one and dones is just as disengious. And honestly, the entity hurt by that scenario was not really Maryland, but Lin. He had no business leaving that early.

Outside of LeBron and Kobe, most players will benefit from more developmental time in college. They go into the NBA as a better player, which helps them and the league. Leaving so early is just stunting so many players' development. And not just stars, but guys who never learn how to be a role player.

but if you think only true blue bloods got top tier blue chip prospects prior to the one and done rule, you obviously didn't watch basketball in the 80s. And since I know you did, I don't understand your argument there. There was more depth of talent, and blue chip talent did filter down more often. And now it doesn't because of the simple math: Kentucky now has slots to fill every year, and playing time to offer they previously didn't have.

Of course the one and done rule has an effect on college basketball. Arguing otherwise is to ignore the last decade.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by rockchlkjayhku11

Cincinnati, OH

Member since Aug 2006

36521 posts

Posted on 3/2/15 at 10:43 pm to Baloo

I am gonna be picky on a few things you said.

Brad Stevens is obviously relevant. He coached butler to 2 of the 5 final fours you acknowledge in your next sentence. Not sure if you were playing dumb or what, but dismissing that was weird as you didn't make a counterpoint either, which you previously pointed out someone else doing.

No mid major lost because of a missed buzzer beater. That's disingenuous. It was a half court heave. Additionally, that team had 2 NBA contributors (one of them is a borderline all star) on it and was more of an exception than the rule. VCU and George mason obviously fit the mold you are describing, but a couple fluke runs is not that crazy in the grand scheme of things.

Lastly, Alex Len was not a one and done player and the guy you responded to definitely didn't watch college basketball in the 80s

I don't really disagree with too much you said. There is certainly a trickle down effect with the one and done rule that ends up affecting more than the 5 schools who get the players. I just wanted to point out those things because I often feel like people see your username and just think everything is right.

This post was edited on 3/2/15 at 10:46 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by RTR America

Memphis, TN

Member since Aug 2012

39600 posts

Posted on 3/2/15 at 11:07 pm to Baloo

quote:
the difference is that there used to be some filter down to midlevel Power 5 teams. Now, there barely is

Yeah I'm not seeing a difference.

1st round picks last year by school:
Kansas (2)
Duke (2)
Arizona (1)
Oklahoma State (1)
Kentucky (2)
Michigan (2)
Indiana (1)
Lousiana Lafayette (1)
Creighton (1)
UCLA (3)
NC State (1)
Michigan State (2)
Syracuse (1)
UCONN (1)
Washington (1)
Stanford (1)

*Bold to denote 1 and done players (Their were 9 in total)

quote:
Alex Lin was a terrible player for Maryland, but he still left after one year because, well, he is 7 feet tall and the NBA still values big guys.

This has been going on for years, even before the 1 and done rule. Trevor Ariza for example left after his freshman season (before the 1 and done rule) and fell to the 2nd round. Lin got drafted in the top 5. He's already starting to look like a very good pro in his second season.

quote:
And honestly, the entity hurt by that scenario was not really Maryland, but Lin. He had no business leaving that early.

He was projected top 5 pick. Every kid would have left for that.

quote:
most players will benefit from more developmental time in college.

Over 75% of these 1 and done guys really don't if you look at the actual guys that did leave.

The college game really doesn't do that great of a job at developing these players because they are so micromanaged by these college coaches.

Look at this:

LINK

The way you are looking at this is just completely wrong.

quote:
you obviously didn't watch basketball in the 80s. And since I know you did, I don't understand your argument there. There was more depth of talent, and blue chip talent did filter down more often.

The depth of talent is fine, what has changed is style of play. CBB is about to set a record for its slowest pace of play in the shot clock era.

quote:
Of course the one and done rule has an effect on college basketball.

I'm not saying it doesn't have an effect, but it is WAYYYYY down the list on issues CBB has right now. It truly only effects less than 2% of D1 schools.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by SlowFlowPro

Simple Solutions to Complex Probs

Member since Jan 2004

425837 posts

Posted on 3/3/15 at 9:24 am to Baloo

quote:
Alex Lin was a terrible player for Maryland, but he still left after one year because, well, he is 7 feet tall and the NBA still values big guys. To act like only Kentucky is affected by one and dones is just as disengious. And honestly, the entity hurt by that scenario was not really Maryland, but Lin. He had no business leaving that early.

i think Len is a great example of leaving early being great. Len was hurt a lot of last year but is coming around this year

i think he leads the NBA in blocks since the ASG. it's not likely that he'd be developing that kind of rim protection in college, esp with how much college relies on zone D.

quote:
Outside of LeBron and Kobe, most players will benefit from more developmental time in college. They go into the NBA as a better player, which helps them and the league.

other than marketability, i don't see how playing a different game, being coached by inferior coaches, and having limited coaching time can be argued to develop players better for the NBA game. college coaches are not coaching for NBA development adn this often leads to massive gaps that the player would not be receiving if he spent that time being developed for the NBA game by NBA professionals (coaches, trainers, statisticians, etc)

1 ...

Report Post