Comments on: NBA Lockout Speculation: Two-and-Through All But Certain?

By: mike

mike — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 22:08:04 +0000

I THINK THAT THE KIDS ARE OLD ENOUGH TO GO FROM HIGH SCHOOL. IT MAKES NO SENSE THAT THESE KIDS CAN GO TO IRAQ AT 18 YEARS OLD BUT GOING TO THE NBA?? OH NO THERE NOT MATURE ENOUGH. BUT THE WORLD ALWAYS HOLDS THINGS AGAINST THEM AND THE VETERAN PLAYERS AND RETIRED ONES WHO WERENT GOOD ENOUGH TO GO PRO STRAIGHT OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL HAVE HATRED INSTEAD OF CONCERN. WHEN HAS ANYONE EVER GAVE ONE YOU KNOW WHAT ON THE DECSIONS THAT YOUNG BLACKMEN MAKE IN LIFE?? THEY ARE TRYING TO SELL IT LIKE THEY CARE ABOUT THESE KIDS AND WANT TO HELP THEM SOO MUCH. IF THE NBA RAISES THE LIMIT THEN NCAA SHOULD RAISE THE GPA LIMIT TO 3.0 SINCE THEY ARE SOOOO CONCERNED ABOUT THESE KIDS MATURING AND GETTING A EDUACATION.

By: rtmsf

rtmsf — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 00:55:13 +0000

In reply to Dave. Don't worry Dave. They'll be getting paid for their two years of servitude soon enough.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 23:18:09 +0000

Thank goodness people are willing to take away the rights of young men, so they can do “what’s best for them”.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 12:54:58 +0000

It’s probably good to remember that when you say “the players” what you really mean is “the agents” because unlike in most sports, the NBA players’ union isn’t run by the players. The agents control it, which is part of why we have a lockout in the first place.

That said, while I’d prefer the three-and-out rule the NFL and baseball have, I’ll be OK with two-and-through.

By: garik16

garik16 — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 02:29:46 +0000

Wilko, you’re right, which is why this is one of the few things there won’t be much of an issue about.

But the key point is that this is an issue that matters far more to one side (the owners) than the other (the players). They can attempt to use it, in addition to other things, to get additional concessions without much of a danger of getting screwed over, since they’re fine either way.

The players are certainly better with a longer age limit – but it’s a minor benefit at best.

By: rtmsf

rtmsf — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 23:28:08 +0000

In reply to wilko. In a long-run view, they stand for the players hitting the free market as soon as possible, but from a practical one, it certainly pushes more vets toward the unemployment line sooner by having young and unproven (not to mention cheaper) guys taking their spots.

By: wilko

wilko — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 23:09:19 +0000

I really dont get the Player union stance on this.

It protects the guys currently in the league and secures their jobs; to keep rookies out longer.