The NBA had extremely poor ratings for its marquee event, the Finals, and has had a tumultuous offseason, with the specter of organized crime and thrown games or at least point shaving / adding - and the possibility that more refs or even players were involved - hanging over the Tim Donaghy scandal, at least until all the facts are out.
So the NBA is in dire need of a makeover. KG and Kobe trade rumors will divert attention from the underlying problems for only so long, after all. And the man in charge, David Stern, seems to have lost some of his luster; one of his biggest fans, Bill Simmons, who used to write that Stern should be President, now compares him to a near-senile Red Auerbach, and says if the summer brings no changes, then it's time to '[take] away the car keys.'
So how to fix the NBA? Let me start with just one problem, and address others in later posts. First, the draft:
The very idea of the draft strikes me as immoral - the kind of thing that should be illegal. Aside from the odious connotations of slavery raised by elderly rich white men 'owning' young black men, determining their working conditions, their pay, and indeed their opportunity for employment in their chosen field, there's more to dislike: it violates the right to choose one's employer, taken for granted in labor relations in all other businesses besides professional sport.
Imagine you, a hotshot young med school grad, knowing there are numerous places around the country that would love to employ you - and being told instead that your 'rights' were owned by, say, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN - and if you didn't want to move to their nice little burg and endure their godforsaken winters, well, you can just forget about being a doctor. Oh, and previous doctors likewise forced to labor there have bargained away any ability for you to determine your pay - you can accept what the Mayo Clinic is offering, or you can forget about being a doctor. At least, a paid doctor.
Naturally, there would be an uproar, marching in the streets, protests over the injustice involved; surely the defenders of free market capitalism would be apoplectic at so many of their most cherished principles being annihilated. Funny, then, the silence over sports league drafts. Certainly the athletes are well compensated despite being denied their most elementary bargaining rights - is that it? I doubt it; well-paid doctors would still scream bloody murder if this system were instituted. No, residual racism and an undue respect for tradition seem the more likely culprits.
But change involves the art of the possible; so while I think the draft should be abolished (and replaced with free agency for all, every year, doing away with both trades and long-term contracts), I will stick with something that could actually happen in my suggestions here. Just remember, for me what follows is a distant second best.
Given that the draft will continue, the most serious problem with it is the phenomenon of early entry, in which 22 year old (or older) seniors are drafted alongside callow 18-19 year old freshmen, making comparative evaluation an even trickier business. Allowing youngsters into the NBA also hurts the league in two other ways (at least): it weakens benches, in that youngsters who are 'projects' and whom the team control for 4 seasons are drafted and kept, over older players who have less 'projection' but are better players NOW. So the quality of play is hurt by early entry, at least as it exists now. The introduction of the minor league NBDL and the ability of teams to option players mitigates this, but only partially.
The second way it hurts the league is through compensation issues - players know they hit their large, long-term paydays only after they have been in the league long enough to qualify for free agency, so they have every incentive to begin that process as early as possible, both to get to free agency at a younger age and to maximize their number of opportunities at free agency throughout their career. Teams hence have to pay major cash to players at young ages, or lose them, and hence are making mammoth money judgments under far more uncertainty than would be the case if they could wait a bit longer. Suboptimal asset allocation results - in layman's terms, busts get a big payday too often.
Given my preferred solution is a non-starter (no draft, free agency for all every year, with Bird rights to go over cap to re-sign players who had been with their team 3+ seasons - to help with continuity) - well, what's second-best?
Here's my suggestion: Make the draft eligible to anyone (removing possible legal problems that deserve a suit by some 18-year old soon). But dictate that anyone who enters the league before they are 21 (or their college class graduates) is ineligible for a multiyear contract or slot money - they must be paid as a free agent, and are automatically free agents again after one season. But they cannot sign a long-term contract until they are 21 - no matter when they entered the league.
This rule, if put into force, would greatly reduce the undergraduate 'project' early entry problem. An early-entry player would be like a one-year 'street' free agent, and the team would have no additional incentive (in terms of keeping that player for the future) over a similar veteran. Indeed, less, for the vet could sign a multiyear contract if he exceeded expectations. A LeBron could still declare straight out of high school, but he would be property of the team that drafted him for only one season. Hence, he would only be drafted if it was worth it for that year, not because of future expectations for his greatness.
The result: better benches and players in the league, and the free publicity (and scouting, with attendant diminution of risk) that the NCAA hype machine provides would likewise make rookies far better bets, and far better known and loved, once they actually entered the league. And the few exceptions, like a LeBron, would engender even more publicity as teams vied to acquire his services a season at a time, especially as he entered his age 21 season and the prospect of signing him long-term.
In short, this would be a remedy for much of what ails the draft process. Mr. Stern, I wish you were listening....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment