A. Owners love the idea of a higher age limit in the NBA — it gives them more time to see how a player matures, allows more time to scout them so taking the player is less of a gamble, and it lets the NCAA do a couple years of marketing to create names for players that the league can then capitalize on.
B. Mark Cuban is an NBA owner. Fairly outspoken one
So A+B= Cuban favors raising the age limit. He’d like it at three years, actually. Shocking.
“It’s not even so much about lottery busts,” Cuban said. “It’s about kids’ lives that we’re ruining. Even if you’re a first-round pick and you have three years of guaranteed money — or two years now of guaranteed money — then what? Because if you’re a bust and it turns out you just can’t play in the NBA, your ‘rocks for jocks’ one year of schooling isn’t going to get you far.
“I just don’t think it takes into consideration the kids enough. Obviously, I think there’s significant benefit for the NBA. It’s not my decision to make, but that’s my opinion on it.”
You are ruining a kid’s life by drafting him in the first round and giving him some guaranteed millions? Even if he is a bust he should be set for life (many aren’t, but that’s not about a year in college because plenty of four-year players blew their NBA paychecks).
Drafting a kid out of high school is hard because, well, predicting what any 18-year-old will be like in five years is a crapshoot.
But I think if you are 18 and you are old enough to get married or join the army or do anything else with your life you should be able to play in the NBA if you are good enough. Is there really a reason that the LeBron James/Kobe Bryant/Dwight Howard type players have to go to college other than the owners don’t like the risk?
I’d still prefer a baseball style system — NBA teams can draft a guy out of high school but if he does go to college he needs to stay two or three years. It’s not a perfect system either, but it’s better than one-and-done.