G League to offer $125K to elite prospects as alternative to college one-and-done

[BleedGopher]

per ESPN:

In a move that could challenge the NCAA's monopoly on elite talent, the NBA's G League is creating a new venture as an alternative to the one-and-done route for the best American basketball prospects, it was announced Thursday.

As part of a newly formed professional path starting in the summer of 2019, the G League will offer "Select Contracts" worth $125,000 to elite prospects who are at least 18 years old but not yet eligible for the NBA draft.

The G League will target recent or would-be high school graduates who otherwise would have likely spent just one season playing college basketball, enticing them not only with a six-figure salary but also the opportunity to benefit from NBA infrastructure, as well as a bevy of off-court development programs "geared toward facilitating and accelerating their transition to the pro game," league president Malcolm Turner told ESPN.

Without the restrictions of the NCAA's amateurism rules, players will also be free to hire agents, profit off their likenesses and pursue marketing deals from sneaker companies and the like, which could be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in endorsement opportunities to top prospects.

"We appreciate the NBA's decision to provide additional opportunities for those who would like to pursue their dream of playing professionally," NCAA president Mark Emmert said in a statement. "The NCAA recently implemented significant reforms to support student-athlete success, including more flexibility when deciding whether to play professionally.

"Obtaining a college education continues to provide unmatched preparation for success in life for the majority of student-athletes and remains an excellent path to professional sports for many. However, this change provides another option for those who would prefer not to attend college but want to directly pursue professional basketball."

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...-prospects-not-wanting-go-one-done-route-ncaa

Go Gophers!!

 

[Stan]

I bet some guys take advantage of this. $125K is nothing to sneeze at even for guys who are going to be first round picks.

 

[Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0]

Now what is Coach Cal going to do?

 

[Gophers_4life]

I'm certain some of the elite prospects would much prefer $125k in their pocket and not having to go to class and study.

Would rather the ones who go to college be the ones who want to earn a degree and spend 4 years getting developed by high level coaches.

 

[Holy Man]

I'm certain some of the elite prospects would much prefer $125k in their pocket and not having to go to class and study.

Would rather the ones who go to college be the ones who want to earn a degree and spend 4 years getting developed by high level coaches.

I think a lot of the one and dones are not in class as is. I'm not sure this makes a difference in that part of the equation. The cash sure could, though, and as everyone has said, it will be helpful for guys whose sole focus is on professional basketball. More instruction time, maybe better coaching, and higher quality competition. I'm not sure I am with Cal who says the pros should guarantee college for the guys who sign with the minors. That functionally eliminates any risk on the part of the player and his family. In baseball a lot of contracts include college scholarships, but I think that's negotiated, and the team has to decide if its worth it to make that guarantee. The player has some leverage with a college versus pro route. Currently, the basketball player has no leverage in the negotiation. For most players, college will be a better option long-term, but for the few can't miss prospects or guys who have no interest, desire, or ability to go to college, $125,000 is a pretty good deal.

This all assumes, of course, that Nike and Adidas choose not to outbid the G-League and place guys in college.

 

[gopherhoopsguy]

This is great for both the NCAA and the NBA

1. Gets rid of the players who don’t want to be here
2 The parents demanding money will be reduced
3. Better college game when u have more upperclassmen
4. More parity
5. Fewer one and done
6. Up close scouting for NBA, less gambles for NBA draft instead of long term deals that they can’t get out of. Now only 125k for 1 year.
8. Less bitching about players aren’t getting paid
9.Deeper minor league for NBA
I absolutely love this for the NCAA and NBA

 

[die hard gopher]

This is great for both the NCAA and the NBA

1. Gets rid of the players who don’t want to be here
2 The parents demanding money will be reduced
3. Better college game when u have more upperclassmen
4. More parity
5. Fewer one and done
6. Up close scouting for NBA, less gambles for NBA draft instead of long term deals that they can’t get out of. Now only 125k for 1 year.
8. Less bitching about players aren’t getting paid
9.Deeper minor league for NBA
I absolutely love this for the NCAA and NBA

I think the NCAA is better off with as much talent as possible even if said talent isn't going to class and only staying for a year.

NCAA basketball will always have a large base no matter what but they get much more national coverage and viewership from folks who are only interested in watching projected top NBA prospects than they otherwise would if those guys weren't there.

 

[gopherhoopsguy]

Couldn’t disagree with u more! Fans watch there favorite college team! That will never change! 98% of fans don’t follow recruiting don’t know who is a 5 Star top 5 guy out of high school. They follow there college team. They will watch there team If it’s 5 Star Sam or 4 Star Brad.

 

[die hard gopher]

Couldn’t disagree with u more! Fans watch there favorite college team! That will never change! 98% of fans don’t follow recruiting don’t know who is a 5 Star top 5 guy out of high school. They follow there college team. They will watch there team If it’s 5 Star Sam or 4 Star Brad.

Thats not my point. Yes, college basketball fans will always watch their team no matter what.

I'm saying there are also a lot of people that watch college basketball who aren't actually fans of college basketball or any particular team but rather are fans of NBA teams and watch college basketball only to see what their potential draft pick looks like and what the future of the NBA looks like. The NCAA will loose those types of viewers. Guys like Stephen A Smith on ESPN First Take really only talk about college basketball with the view of an NBA lense of who will be a top pick. He rarely ever discusses which team is best and that is the type of coverage the NCAA will loose out on.

 

[gopherhoopsguy]

Got it!

 

[Gophers_4life]

From the Hurt thread:

I thought this was a discussion about elite prospects who nearly always play at elite programs. Most players sign shoe deals before they step foot on an NBA court. While it's convenient to use Steph Curry as an example, most "elite" draft picks don't have quite the same career trajectory and may be dependent upon a good first deal. Look at Anthony Bennett, he was the first overall pick, I don't have any clue how much his shoe deal was worth but it was probably better than what he would have earned coming out of the G-League.

Anyway, do you know what players are eligible for the $125K? I haven't read too much about this, is it top 100 prospects? I suppose Matthew Hurt would qualify.

If I understand you correctly (which I admit, I may not have!), your argument to an elite prospect to convince him to go to an elite college program for a 1-and-done instead of taking the G-league deal would be .... if you go to the elite college program and are a star, you will likely get a bigger shoe deal before you ever play in the league.

And even that, I think would have to be tempered by how high the player is drafted. If a star in college and high draft pick, then yes, I get what you're saying. But a guy who stars in the G-league I think would also be a high draft pick, and will get hyped up prior to the draft (similar to how a European player would be).


I don't know any further details about the program other than what is publicly known.

 

[Gophers_4life]

I think a lot of the one and dones are not in class as is. I'm not sure this makes a difference in that part of the equation. The cash sure could, though, and as everyone has said, it will be helpful for guys whose sole focus is on professional basketball. More instruction time, maybe better coaching, and higher quality competition. I'm not sure I am with Cal who says the pros should guarantee college for the guys who sign with the minors. That functionally eliminates any risk on the part of the player and his family. In baseball a lot of contracts include college scholarships, but I think that's negotiated, and the team has to decide if its worth it to make that guarantee. The player has some leverage with a college versus pro route. Currently, the basketball player has no leverage in the negotiation. For most players, college will be a better option long-term, but for the few can't miss prospects or guys who have no interest, desire, or ability to go to college, $125,000 is a pretty good deal.

This all assumes, of course, that Nike and Adidas choose not to outbid the G-League and place guys in college.

Nike is now the brand on the NBA uniforms and apparel. Shouldn't that be the same for the G-League teams?

 

[howeda7]

This is great for both the NCAA and the NBA

1. Gets rid of the players who don’t want to be here
2 The parents demanding money will be reduced
3. Better college game when u have more upperclassmen
4. More parity
5. Fewer one and done
6. Up close scouting for NBA, less gambles for NBA draft instead of long term deals that they can’t get out of. Now only 125k for 1 year.
8. Less bitching about players aren’t getting paid
9.Deeper minor league for NBA
I absolutely love this for the NCAA and NBA

I agree for the most part. I used to feel that it would lessen the game not to have the top talent. But we're only talking about the top 20-30 guys. And I went to several D-II tournament games this Spring and they were some of the best games I've seen in a long time. Goo,d well played basketball will still be entertaining regardless.

 

[watertown 1987 guy n]

Now what is Coach Cal going to do?

The cost of recruiting and under the table payments just went up for some schools.

 

[GopherHoopsFan]

From the Hurt thread:



If I understand you correctly (which I admit, I may not have!), your argument to an elite prospect to convince him to go to an elite college program for a 1-and-done instead of taking the G-league deal would be .... if you go to the elite college program and are a star, you will likely get a bigger shoe deal before you ever play in the league.

And even that, I think would have to be tempered by how high the player is drafted. If a star in college and high draft pick, then yes, I get what you're saying. But a guy who stars in the G-league I think would also be a high draft pick, and will get hyped up prior to the draft (similar to how a European player would be).


I don't know any further details about the program other than what is publicly known.

I understand your logic to be sure, I just don't believe that popularity and visibility aren't important here. The end result is that an elite prospect becomes rich either way, so I guess in that sense you're absolutely correct. But still, nobody in the general public watches the NBA G League with much interest, millions of people watch college hoops. In basketball, individual brand building is increasingly prevalent, so I think that immediate exposure to the public in college will result in higher name recognition and will net bigger endorsements. Anyway, it's all conjecture but it's interesting to think about.

 

[Gophers_4life]

You could be exactly right. We will see how it plays out!

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

If the #1 prospect signs with the Iowa Wolves, I guarantee the NBA would find a way to get the G-League games involving him on ESPN in addition to NBA TV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gophers_4life]

If the #1 prospect signs with the Iowa Wolves, I guarantee the NBA would find a way to get the G-League games involving him on ESPN in addition to NBA TV.

That's a great example. And the Iowa Wolves are well supported, in a really nice arena too. You're talking like the Triple-A of NBA minor league teams. I think it would happen. And Nike would like it because -- I assume -- the Nike branding deal for the NBA also includes Nike brands on the G-league uniforms.

Now granted, the Iowa Wolves are never going to be as popular as probably even the Iowa Hawkeyes or Iowa St Cyclones, in the state, let alone when you talk national brands. So sure, Nike (Addidas, etc.) would sell more Nike branded apparel for national college BB brands than it would for G-league brands. But still ...

 

[WoodburyTim]

I'm skeptical that the D-League is going to become that much more popular with the addition of a little better talent. Now I think that there will be some guys that want the money quicker and take this deal, but they are still going to be playing in front of small crowds in the D-League while March Madness plays to very large crowds and national attention.

 

[Zeppelin Gopher]

I'm skeptical that the D-League is going to become that much more popular with the addition of a little better talent. Now I think that there will be some guys that want the money quicker and take this deal, but they are still going to be playing in front of small crowds in the D-League while March Madness plays to very large crowds and national attention.

Yep, I think people are really overlooking the lifestyle factor here.

Which of these options sounds more fun:

A: Big Man on Campus. Spend 8 months on a leafy college campus surrounded by parties and tons of good looking girls while occasionally attending classes. Training and practicing in a modern college facility. Traveling to road games on chartered planes and staying in quality hotels. Gaining tons of exposure by playing all of your games on national TV.

B: Spending a season living in a smaller town on your own. Long bus rides, cramped commercial flights. Spartan training facilities and accommodations. Limited exposure TV wise and ZERO glory or lifelong memories compared to March Madness.

 

[Zeppelin Gopher]

Additionally, there is the development question here. Why would a D-League team have incentive to develop these top prospects? The Iowa Wolves could sign a top ranked high school kid, but odds are overwhelmingly high that the parent franchise (Timberwolves in this case) would not be in position to draft said prospect. So why where is the incentive to force feed minutes to a kid who will never play for your NBA club?

This may surprise some people, but there would only be a small handful of high school kids who would be ready to contribute to a winning D-League team at 18-19 years old. It's a higher level of basketball than the college game, and you'd be playing against physically mature men as opposed to playing strictly against your peers age wise.

I'll be very interested to hear the nuts and bolts of this system.

 

[alchemy2u]

Additionally, there is the development question here. Why would a D-League team have incentive to develop these top prospects? The Iowa Wolves could sign a top ranked high school kid, but odds are overwhelmingly high that the parent franchise (Timberwolves in this case) would not be in position to draft said prospect. So why where is the incentive to force feed minutes to a kid who will never play for your NBA club?

This may surprise some people, but there would only be a small handful of high school kids who would be ready to contribute to a winning D-League team at 18-19 years old. It's a higher level of basketball than the college game, and you'd be playing against physically mature men as opposed to playing strictly against your peers age wise.

I'll be very interested to hear the nuts and bolts of this system.

That is very true, why would a team develop a kid that is basically a free agent. They would have to follow some sort of baseball/hockey model where the teams have the players rights. As for competing with colleges, if all of the best young players go to the D league, then the fans will follow and national interest in college BB would be hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WoodburyTim]

That is very true, why would a team develop a kid that is basically a free agent. They would have to follow some sort of baseball/hockey model where the teams have the players rights. As for competing with colleges, if all of the best young players go to the D league, then the fans will follow and national interest in college BB would be hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I disagree with the last part. There are many college fans that do not have much interest in the pro game. I watch the first round of March Madness with about the same 20 guys every year, most follow college basketball fairly closely and the Gophers even closer. And 1 or 2 might watch a few NBA games a year. And the Wolves have always better talent than the Gophers and always will. Just two completely different products. It is anecdotal evidence to be sure, but a theme I hear often.

 

[alchemy2u]

I disagree with the last part. There are many college fans that do not have much interest in the pro game. I watch the first round of March Madness with about the same 20 guys every year, most follow college basketball fairly closely and the Gophers even closer. And 1 or 2 might watch a few NBA games a year. And the Wolves have always better talent than the Gophers and always will. Just two completely different products. It is anecdotal evidence to be sure, but a theme I hear often.

I know what you are saying and actually agree to a point, but we have already seen a decrease in the quality of college basketball with most good players leaving early. If the NBA is serious about building a real development league, they will fill the teams with a lot of young players, more than just the super star high school prospects. That means that they will also be luring away many of the next tier of good players to fill out the teams and lock up prospects early, many of which will never play in the NBA. Imagine losing the top 1-2 players from every P5 team in addition to the players that P5 schools will lose to fill in the blue bloods. It could be a domino effect that would further dilute the college BB game.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Yep, I think people are really overlooking the lifestyle factor here.

Which of these options sounds more fun:

A: Big Man on Campus. Spend 8 months on a leafy college campus surrounded by parties and tons of good looking girls while occasionally attending classes. Training and practicing in a modern college facility. Traveling to road games on chartered planes and staying in quality hotels. Gaining tons of exposure by playing all of your games on national TV.

B: Spending a season living in a smaller town on your own. Long bus rides, cramped commercial flights. Spartan training facilities and accommodations. Limited exposure TV wise and ZERO glory or lifelong memories compared to March Madness.

Additionally, there is the development question here. Why would a D-League team have incentive to develop these top prospects? The Iowa Wolves could sign a top ranked high school kid, but odds are overwhelmingly high that the parent franchise (Timberwolves in this case) would not be in position to draft said prospect. So why where is the incentive to force feed minutes to a kid who will never play for your NBA club?

This may surprise some people, but there would only be a small handful of high school kids who would be ready to contribute to a winning D-League team at 18-19 years old. It's a higher level of basketball than the college game, and you'd be playing against physically mature men as opposed to playing strictly against your peers age wise.

I'll be very interested to hear the nuts and bolts of this system.

This is a very compelling argument .... IF it's correct. No doubt this will be the argument (or type of argument) that colleges try to sell 1-and-dones on.

My gut feeling is you're overselling the college experience and underselling the G-league experience ... but then again you could be exactly correct.


I can say that the Iowa Wolves have pretty good attendance, I believe at the level of lower P5 level college programs. No idea what their TV viewership/deals are like. So it's not like you're playing in a high school gym. (depending which team you play for)


Also to your point about having no incentive to develop talent. I guess it just depends if the new guy can help them win right now, and that would be the only thing that matters, or not.

And would like to think that if it's the Twolves system/money that is developing the player, that the Twolves should get to somehow have some rights to the player. Isn't there some kind of "rights" thing/system for European players? I may be talking "should" here rather than what is actually true now.

I guess what I envision is like a G-league/"futures" draft, where the NBA programs pick the players, and then have "rights" to those players and send them to their own G-league teams. Then if/when the player is ready, the parent NBA team can simply call-up the player to the big show (while sending someone else down, or releasing). I guess this is something like the MLB system? Why wouldn't they try to set it up like that??

 

[bizzle22]

This is a very compelling argument .... IF it's correct. No doubt this will be the argument (or type of argument) that colleges try to sell 1-and-dones on.

My gut feeling is you're overselling the college experience and underselling the G-league experience ... but then again you could be exactly correct.


I can say that the Iowa Wolves have pretty good attendance, I believe at the level of lower P5 level college programs. No idea what their TV viewership/deals are like. So it's not like you're playing in a high school gym. (depending which team you play for)


Also to your point about having no incentive to develop talent. I guess it just depends if the new guy can help them win right now, and that would be the only thing that matters, or not.

And would like to think that if it's the Twolves system/money that is developing the player, that the Twolves should get to somehow have some rights to the player. Isn't there some kind of "rights" thing/system for European players? I may be talking "should" here rather than what is actually true now.

I guess what I envision is like a G-league/"futures" draft, where the NBA programs pick the players, and then have "rights" to those players and send them to their own G-league teams. Then if/when the player is ready, the parent NBA team can simply call-up the player to the big show (while sending someone else down, or releasing). I guess this is something like the MLB system? Why wouldn't they try to set it up like that??

Yea, I don't think it is a stretch to say there is some major under-selling going on there.

1. I see no mention of money. A prospect who signs one of these G-League deals could easily be looking at $1M+ in their first year after you include endorsements, and possibly a heck of a lot more than that in the case of someone like Zion Williamson who already has quite a bit of marketability. The money part is a pretty big deal.

2. In the G-League they are probably going to be playing against/with some guys who have already played minutes in the NBA. It depends what type of experience they want, but I would think at least some prospects would jump at the thought of proving themselves against better competition.

3. This idea that most G-League teams play in tiny, boring cities is completely false. There are a few that wouldn't be the most fun (Oshkosh, WI comes to mind), but most of them play in cities that are fairly large. There are teams in Austin (TX), Long Island, just outside Chicago, El Segundo (basically Santa Monica, just outside LA), and plenty of other places. They aren't stuck playing in Albert Lea all winter. A lot of the cities that have a team aren't really that much different than Lexington, KY or Lawrence, KS.

Sure, they might not take chartered planes or stay at fancy hotels, but if you've never played for a team that does would you really notice the difference?

 

[RatherBeGolfing]

I disagree with the last part. There are many college fans that do not have much interest in the pro game. I watch the first round of March Madness with about the same 20 guys every year, most follow college basketball fairly closely and the Gophers even closer. And 1 or 2 might watch a few NBA games a year. And the Wolves have always better talent than the Gophers and always will. Just two completely different products. It is anecdotal evidence to be sure, but a theme I hear often.

The diehards would stay, the average casual fan (which, let's be real is a large portion of the March Madness craze) wouldn't care.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Yea, I don't think it is a stretch to say there is some major under-selling going on there.

1. I see no mention of money. A prospect who signs one of these G-League deals could easily be looking at $1M+ in their first year after you include endorsements, and possibly a heck of a lot more than that in the case of someone like Zion Williamson who already has quite a bit of marketability. The money part is a pretty big deal.

2. In the G-League they are probably going to be playing against/with some guys who have already played minutes in the NBA. It depends what type of experience they want, but I would think at least some prospects would jump at the thought of proving themselves against better competition.

3. This idea that most G-League teams play in tiny, boring cities is completely false. There are a few that wouldn't be the most fun (Oshkosh, WI comes to mind), but most of them play in cities that are fairly large. There are teams in Austin (TX), Long Island, just outside Chicago, El Segundo (basically Santa Monica, just outside LA), and plenty of other places. They aren't stuck playing in Albert Lea all winter. A lot of the cities that have a team aren't really that much different than Lexington, KY or Lawrence, KS.

Sure, they might not take chartered planes or stay at fancy hotels, but if you've never played for a team that does would you really notice the difference?

Right. Also some over-selling of the college experience. You're still not making any money (or very little), you still have no car or a crappy car, you still live in a semi-crappy house or apartment with a bunch of other guys, and you DO have class.

The NCAA (and would like to think the U) have minimum requirements for academic achievement to be eligible for the winter semester. You can't just sign up for the minimum credits in the fall and fail all of them, and expect to play in the winter. And you can't make grades by never going to class, never turning in assignments.


Bottom line for me: I want college players to be the guys who want to be there for four years, who want to leave with a bachelor's degree, who want to develop their game over four seasons. That's who I want in college programs. That's my ideal, for what little it's worth.

So I want there to be a real, viable avenue for guys who legitimately don't care about school, and just want to get to the pros as quickly as possible.

 

[Gophers_4life]

The diehards would stay, the average casual fan (which, let's be real is a large portion of the March Madness craze) wouldn't care.

I just can't agree with this.

College teams, football basketball anything, is about the name on the front and winning, beating your rival schools. March Madness casual viewers are about pools of people betting on brackets, and about watching your team go for an upset or a run.

I feel (don't have evidence or proof, just a feeling) that casual Madness viewers would still be there for Duke 1 vs Wichita 8 if there were no future NBA players in the game.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

The diehards would stay, the average casual fan (which, let's be real is a large portion of the March Madness craze) wouldn't care.

I agree with G4L. It's the drama (and the betting) that makes March Madness what it is.