Heard It Through the Grapevine

"I think my biggest problem with the age limit is that the only reason it’s even “necessary” (HEAVY air quotes) is because talent scouts can’t do their jobs."

Great argument. Probably the best one that isn't discussed. The AAU basketball culture doesnt help a lick either.

@Rob: I think, well, know that businesses deny older people jobs in favor of younger people all the time without full blown lawsuits. No one wants to hire a 50 something year old man, like my father, who just got laid off. They might fear he is on the verge of retirement or, because of his experience, would command a higher salary than someone straight out of school. This stuff even happens in restaurants. I had a friend who couldn't get a job at Lover's Egg Roll because he wasn't Asian and they told him they wanted to "keep it real." While a lawsuit would be justifiable in all of these cases, the truth is that it rarely ever happens.

Nevertheless, I am not in support of the age restrictions by any means. I would much rather see a change in the manner in which contracts are given out to NBA players.

There should be some sort of protection for teams who sign players to long term deals who then decide to mail it in and never give any effort again. They are everywhere, but a certain Shawn Bradley comes to mind. The dude barely gave any effort, and, as Dirk even said, never picked up a ball in the offseason. We eventually paid the guy to go away.

Bad contracts with no escape clause also dilute the overall talent level of many teams (which could perhaps be enhanced by allowing 18 year old's in the league). Those in larger markets or with rich owners will just ignore the large contract and spend over the cap, pay the tax and move on with it. Small market teams or teams with tight-pocketed owners do not end up spending enough money to offset talent dilution. The overall result is less competition.

I am aware that there is still the element of free agency, and outbidding for players, etc. This can lead to Ben Wallace contracts out the wazoo. Bad contracts will never be done away with, but they should have some protection. Perhaps force the contracts to be a bit shorter. Make provisions to protect teams from the Shawn Bradley's of the world so that players have incentives to remain competitive. If a construction company is given a contract but never meets deadlines, uses shoddy material, etc., eventually the money that hired the contractor can legally get out of the contract. There needs to be something like this for NBA contracts as well.

@Brayden: Oh, I couldn't agree more. Those kinds of practices do happen all the time, whether on the basis of race or age or any number of other factors. The difference is that this is an institutionalized practice, where the written rule literally prohibits a particular group from being employed. This isn't just an aside or an explanation, but a mandate from the business that they will not hire a specific group of adults on a specific discriminative basis.

If the NBA removes the restriction and some teams still choose to honor it, that's their business. That's the smaller divisions of the business engaging in the practices you mentioned, and eventually it will be their loss. It's almost completely unenforceable, and in the case of individual teams, completely justifiable. But to allow for explicit employment discrimination on the basis of age, when it has very little correlation (or specific merit on a case-by-case basis) with how they perform, is pretty ridiculous. The sports world obviously operates in different world. I'm no expert in the letter of the law, but from where I'm sitting I can't see the legal basis for this kind of restriction.

You nailed it on the contracts, though, and that's where the real problem comes in. The issue is not the rookie-scale first deal or a potentially wasted draft pick, but the disastrous second contract that some of these prospects get under the upside umbrella. It'll take some creativity to change, but that's hopefully something Stern and the league reps hope to tackle in the next CBA.

Since 1995, high schoolers who will have decent 10+ year careers: KG, Kobe, Jermaine O'Neal, TMac, Stephen Jackson, Rashard Lewis, Al Harrington, Chandler, Eddy Curry, Desagana Diop, Amare, LeBron, Kendrick Perkins, Travis Outlaw, DeShawn Stevenson, Dwight Howard, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Andrew Bynum, Monta Ellis

Fence-sitters: Amir Johnson, Andray Blatche, Sebastian Telfair, CJ Miles, Louis Williams, Darius Miles (injury derailed), Dorell Wright, Shaun Livingston (injury derailed

Busts and washouts: Kwame, James Lang, Ndudi Ebi, Robert Swift, Jonathan Bender, Ousmane Cisse, Gerald Green, Leon Smith, Korleone Young

You're welcome to dispute a couple of these, but most are inarguable. So by my count, we've got 21 players who've made it, 8 who are either on their way in (most will have good careers if I had to bet) or out (Livingston and Miles), and 9 huge busts. Even if all eight of the guys "on the fence" wash out that's still a 55% success rate. Likely most of them will at least be rotation guys, so it's probably much closer to 65-70%

A 65% chance on your draft pick becoming a contributor? I'd take those odds. Let them play please.

But if the Army wanted to raise the entry age to 19 or 20 they could. It would be their choice.

I agree that about half the guys who joined the NBA straight out of high school didn't need any more seasoning. The other half? I don't think that point is arguable either.

As far as the NBA goes, its bad business to put out an inferior product, which is the case when underdeveloped, overhyped players enter the league and don't pan out. If they want to place an age limit on entering the league in order to put out a better product in order to make money, I have no qualms with that.

The argument that these players are 'forced' to go to college is garbage as Brandon Jennings showed. They can go make money else where, be it the NBDL or overseas.

I say let them go overseas. And some will thrive. Some will fail miserably because these players more often than not tend to be pampered beyond what makes sense. Others will do as Jennings did, and stumble along and end up in the NBA as enigmas.

@Kirk: I actually don't think the army could lift their age restriction; it's linked to 18 years being the age of majority. So unless there are some serious changes on the federal level, they're stuck with what they've got. Though one could certainly argue that the entire line of thought is irrelevant, as we're arguing public vs. private employment.

And if we're going down the "NBA is a business" road, that doesn't mean they're exempt from working in the interests of their workers. Capitalism loves the cash money, but green is as much in the hands of the business owners as it is in the hands of the working man...though I feel a little dirty calling pro athletes that. Adults are being denied work in a near-monopolized industry on the basis of age. If you flip the script and a young owner is denying an older man a job on the basis of age, that's a full-blown law-suit.

If that responsibility doesn't fall solely on the shoulders of businesses, then the government needs to intervene on behalf of the players. Which is basically what they're doing.

I think my biggest problem with the age limit is that the only reason it's even "necessary" (HEAVY air quotes) is because talent scouts can't do their jobs. As Ziller mentions, it's often former players that are hired rather than legit talent evaluators, and the age limit is just a way to cover their collective asses. It's not Kwame's problem that he was drafted too high; the system should naturally weed out the players who can't make it as pros. I don't think it's particularly fair, or legal, or in the "spirit of capitalism," or positive in whatever other framework you'd like to use, to punish legal adults purely on the basis that some cronies can't do a job they may not have been qualified to do in the first place.

Talent scouting is far from a fool-proof business. People are bound to make mistakes. But the responsibility for those mistakes falls on their shoulders, not the players selected. If they're not good enough, they're not good enough, but don't arbitrarily make that decision on the basis of age.

I can't think of a single other business (besides the NFL, and the US government) that openly declares an age limit to work for them. Some require college degrees, others a technical or trade certificate, both of which would theoretically limit when you would start. But some brilliant people finish college at 18, which is much the same as a basketball "prodigy" wanting to start his basketball career at that age. It's absurd to stop them from working when they're perfectly capable. As fun as it would've been to watch LeBron average 40 and 15 in college, it's hardly necessary.

We've all heard it many times before, but if you can join the Army at 18, you shouldn't be restricted from doing anything else at that age. If some 18 year olds can handle combat situations in foreign countries, I think the oh-so-tough rigors of NBA life can be navigated just fine by others.

I don't see why everyone gets up on their high horse about the age limit anyway. The NBA is a business and its within their right to put an age limit on who may enter. While yes, its true, the NBA does have a monopoly of sorts since its the best league, but its not the only league. Players can go overseas or to the NBDL... sorry if that puts a hurtin on them for a year but I frankly don't care.

I'd rather take my chances with an excellent player having to toil for a year in obscurity or in college than have to deal with seeing a terrible player like Robert Swift or Gerald Green take a roster spot for up to 4 years just to justify the terrible choice.

The NBA is a business, not a charity, and while we might not like that the NCAA makes money off promoting these guys and thus building a base for NBA fans to get excited about (because, again, very hard to get all in a dither over such excellent NBA prospects at the time like BJ Mullins and Robert Swift to name a few).

Bloggers and the like need to quit bitching that "its so unfair! These guys have the right to play in the NBA".

No such 'right' exists ('right' is a word that gets tossed around too much these days). The NBA exists as a platform to make money and as such, the owners and league have a right to set whatever standards they want for thier players. Its happened for Dress code (called racist, and it worked out). It's happened for the age limit (also called racist). Baseball and football have age limits (or in baseballs case a solid set of rules established), why can't basketball?

Just a few more friendly observations:

Money plays a large part in why:

-players may not play for their countries in international competition
-we do not get to see a kid from Xavier dunk on LeBron (though i'm sure damaged pride plays a role too)
-the league is, in some viewpoints, made up of have's and have not's, adding to the overall competitive parity between well managed, high spending teams and poorly managed, profit driven teams (insert Memphis or LA Clips here).

D'oh!

Ziller is unmistakably correct. The age limit is first and foremost about money.

And now, please forgive me for that which I am about to write. These views do not necessarily reflect my personal opinion, but merely a devil's advocate inspired observation.

So what if it is about money? Many things are the way they are primarily because of monetary concerns, especially when it comes to business. Last time I checked, the NBA was a business. In essence, how is this any different than large corporations trying to save their bottom lines by laying off droves of employees? Those with the power and the money are making the decisions that can hurt employees for the sake of the overall gain of a business or those leading that business.

Let's take a step aside and look at politics instead. Oh wait, also very much impacted by where money is and where it could be heading. This is just how things work in capitalist America, for better or for worse.

Taking a basketball purist's stance, I would be happy with no age limit. In fact, I often lament that things are the way that I just described (though I have no intention to delve into ideas for solutions here). However, the more invested I become in NBA basketball, the more I find I end up learning about the business of basketball as much as I do about elements of the game of basketball itself.