SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jun 19, 2011 13:15:37 GMT -5
Then again, we've got a thread about him and don't spell his name correctly. It's Andre DruMMond, not Drumond. Thanks to the "magic of boardland" (otherwise known as "the mods") ... amazingly, that little error has been cleaned up!
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,297
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 20, 2011 17:02:30 GMT -5
From ESPN:
Should Drummond stay at the top?
Andre Drummond (Middletown, Conn./St. Thomas More), the No. 1 overall player in the 2012 class, did not play particularly well this week. In fact, you would expect much more from the gifted, 6-foot-10 center who has all the upside you could ever imagine for a high school prospect. He possesses a ton of talent, elite athletic ability and enormous length. During the week he did not score the ball at his usual pace nor rebound up to his potential. He even could have blocked more shots with his massive length and timely jumping. He did show flashes of star power, but it wasn't enough.
Without offering any excuses, in a camp setting, it is hard to create chemistry and timing on the court -- especially with so many talented prospects on the floor vying to play well. As a big man you rely on the ball being passed to you from your teammates and at times Drummond looked frustrated and did not rebound, run the floor or block shots up to his potential. To be considered the best, it's more than just a great performance or potential, you must be productive on a consistent basis. We will be monitoring his progress and production throughout the summer.
|
|
Bay99
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 510
|
Post by Bay99 on Jul 26, 2011 16:04:15 GMT -5
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,600
|
Post by guru on Jul 26, 2011 16:15:10 GMT -5
Um, we kind of stick out like a sore thumb on this list, no? Can't like our chances.
|
|
KirbyKeger
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,106
|
Post by KirbyKeger on Jul 26, 2011 16:35:26 GMT -5
I doubt he ends up at West Virginia. UConn has been the favorite in this race for awhile, but frankly I find it interesting that he hasn't simply committed yet. You obviously never want to go against Kentucky on the recruiting trail. Needless to say, we have stiff competition.
However, we're consistently listed with Andre, and now, for Telep to put us on a list of 4 is nice to see. Clearly, we've been working hard on him, and maybe its paying off if we're still hanging in there. Now, the point about the holdover year is disconcerting. I don't like our chances if we have a poor season next year, yet there could be a saving grace. It all comes back to Kyle Anderson in my opinion (not necessarily Kyle specifically, but big-name recruits in general). Recruiting is such a game of momentum. It takes big-names to get big-names. If we have a lackluster season and no top-level talent scheduled to join the squad, then we won't be an enticing option for someone like Drummond. He may not even see that we're a team on the rise, with many players of great potential. If you land Anderson, though, the image of the program changes a bit, and all of a sudden, you're paired with a top 15 player in the class who is a known lethal distributor and playmaker.
I'm not saying I like that we have so much riding on Kyle, just that its simply the way things go in recruiting. Its all about momentum. Maybe its unlikely, but oh man,what if the chips fell in our favor and we ended up with Drummond and Anderson in our 2012 class? Unlikely, yes, but impossible? Maybe not.
|
|
alleninxis
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,216
|
Post by alleninxis on Jul 26, 2011 16:37:41 GMT -5
With him doing a post-grad year, the question is; why the heck would anyone with his talent spend a year in college when he could be in the NBA?
I think the answer is..he won't. Unless the NBA really is locked out for 2 years.
|
|
KirbyKeger
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,106
|
Post by KirbyKeger on Jul 26, 2011 17:08:39 GMT -5
Ahhh, good point, I forgot to consider the current NBA situation. It is certainly possible that the one and done will be gone. Its too bad in my opinion. I really got tired of watching totally unpolished high school players going in the middle of the first round, and now it looks as though we could be headed back in that direction. Oh well.
|
|
alleninxis
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,216
|
Post by alleninxis on Jul 26, 2011 17:16:09 GMT -5
The one and done can remain and he'll still be eligible for the 2012 draft. He is a special case, not many other kids (none have so far) would elect to do a post-grad year instead of going to college for a year.
|
|
CaliHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,184
|
Post by CaliHoya on Jul 26, 2011 19:57:12 GMT -5
I never understand this - why would one and done be eliminated?
From both the owners and players perspective, they have incentives to keep high schoolers out. Players in high school are not in the union and therefore don't have a voice. Meanwhile those in the union look out for themselves most of all. Fewer high schoolers means less competition for salaries. Rational union players would want the age limit to increase, not go away.
Owners don't want the headache and uncertainty of getting high schoolers. They'd rather see them go to college, get free marketing, and be more of a sure thing when they get to the NBA.
I think the union is posturing. They claim they want the one and done rule gone, but really, they just want to use it as something they concede to get something from the owners.
|
|
|
Post by gtowndynasty on Jul 26, 2011 20:48:56 GMT -5
I never understand this - why would one and done be eliminated? From both the owners and players perspective, they have incentives to keep high schoolers out. Players in high school are not in the union and therefore don't have a voice. Meanwhile those in the union look out for themselves most of all. Fewer high schoolers means less competition for salaries. Rational union players would want the age limit to increase, not go away. Owners don't want the headache and uncertainty of getting high schoolers. They'd rather see them go to college, get free marketing, and be more of a sure thing when they get to the NBA. I think the union is posturing. They claim they want the one and done rule gone, but really, they just want to use it as something they concede to get something from the owners. Exactly. It will go to two and done before the one and done is eliminated. ITs no different than the NFL negotiations. Who got screwed, rookies not represented in the discussions. Making players wait longer to get into the L means more roster spots available to vets and more opportunity ownership can scout talent so as to not end up with another Kwame Brown situation...
|
|
|
Post by bronxhoya87 on Jul 27, 2011 8:39:59 GMT -5
Why do people keep saying the same stuff regarding the one and done? If the one and done is killed it will go to 2 and done. Going straight from high school is not coming back. It was bad for the game, bad for teams and bad for executives. Too much risk.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Jul 27, 2011 10:47:27 GMT -5
Why do people keep saying the same stuff regarding the one and done? If the one and done is killed it will go to 2 and done. Going straight from high school is not coming back. It was bad for the game, bad for teams and bad for executives. Too much risk. I respectfully disagree. As much as they don't want another Kwame Brown debacle, there have got to be just as many if not more owners who want to get the next Lebron (or Dwight Howard, or Kobe, or T-Mac, or whoever) into the league as soon as possible. You can't let the Wizards' mismanagement screw over the NBA forever. The Solomonic solution would be for the NBA to adopt the MLB/NHL model, allowing direct entry by true high school superstars but diverting everyone else into the college ranks for 2-3 years before they become draft-eligible again. This would likely be optimal from the perspective of the middle ranks of the NBPA, the younger veterans and journeymen who could easily be bumped from their roster spot by the low-cost early entrants but aren't in direct competition with the studs who would leap straight from high school.
|
|
|
Post by bronxhoya87 on Jul 27, 2011 11:02:52 GMT -5
Who determines who is a true superstar? Why do people keep saying the same stuff regarding the one and done? If the one and done is killed it will go to 2 and done. Going straight from high school is not coming back. It was bad for the game, bad for teams and bad for executives. Too much risk. I respectfully disagree. As much as they don't want another Kwame Brown debacle, there have got to be just as many if not more owners who want to get the next Lebron (or Dwight Howard, or Kobe, or T-Mac, or whoever) into the league as soon as possible. You can't let the Wizards' mismanagement screw over the NBA forever. The Solomonic solution would be for the NBA to adopt the MLB/NHL model, allowing direct entry by true high school superstars but diverting everyone else into the college ranks for 2-3 years before they become draft-eligible again. This would likely be optimal from the perspective of the middle ranks of the NBPA, the younger veterans and journeymen who could easily be bumped from their roster spot by the low-cost early entrants but aren't in direct competition with the studs who would leap straight from high school.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,209
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jul 27, 2011 12:16:47 GMT -5
Who determines who is a true superstar? I respectfully disagree. As much as they don't want another Kwame Brown debacle, there have got to be just as many if not more owners who want to get the next Lebron (or Dwight Howard, or Kobe, or T-Mac, or whoever) into the league as soon as possible. You can't let the Wizards' mismanagement screw over the NBA forever. The Solomonic solution would be for the NBA to adopt the MLB/NHL model, allowing direct entry by true high school superstars but diverting everyone else into the college ranks for 2-3 years before they become draft-eligible again. This would likely be optimal from the perspective of the middle ranks of the NBPA, the younger veterans and journeymen who could easily be bumped from their roster spot by the low-cost early entrants but aren't in direct competition with the studs who would leap straight from high school. Why, the superstars themselves, of course! I think that's the problem with Rosslyn's suggestion. It sounds good in theory, but there's no way the league will have the authority to pick and choose, as an approach like that is rife with legal problems. So we end up with the old system, and for every LeBron, Kobe or Dwight there will be ten Korleone Youngs who will skip college, still get drafted, and wash out. Speaking solely as a fan, I would much rather see 1 and done or (better yet) 2 and done than this.
|
|
|
Post by gtowndynasty on Jul 27, 2011 14:07:19 GMT -5
Why do people keep saying the same stuff regarding the one and done? If the one and done is killed it will go to 2 and done. Going straight from high school is not coming back. It was bad for the game, bad for teams and bad for executives. Too much risk. I respectfully disagree. As much as they don't want another Kwame Brown debacle, there have got to be just as many if not more owners who want to get the next Lebron (or Dwight Howard, or Kobe, or T-Mac, or whoever) into the league as soon as possible. You can't let the Wizards' mismanagement screw over the NBA forever. The Solomonic solution would be for the NBA to adopt the MLB/NHL model, allowing direct entry by true high school superstars but diverting everyone else into the college ranks for 2-3 years before they become draft-eligible again. This would likely be optimal from the perspective of the middle ranks of the NBPA, the younger veterans and journeymen who could easily be bumped from their roster spot by the low-cost early entrants but aren't in direct competition with the studs who would leap straight from high school. Therein lies the problem with your approach...Kwame Brown was a superstar right here in GA as a prep. And GMs and organizations alike would much rather judge and evaluate a player amongst MEN of equal or greater size/strength/athleticism. Your approach would cater to the BEASTs who peak young and look good amongst lesser competition. By mandating prospects go to college or overseas you see them against better comp and are better able to scout/project them. Furthermore, who is the gatekeeper for determining the "real superstars" from the "wannabees" in your scenario? That approach just doesnt work. It isnt attractive from a fan's perspective, an owners perspective, or a GM's perspective (whose job is on the line if he makes the wrong choice). One and done rule MIGHT get abolished, but it will be in favor of two and done... Didnt mean to hijack your thread Mr. Drummond. Come to G'Town and develop!
|
|
|
Post by bronxhoya87 on Jul 27, 2011 14:07:38 GMT -5
2 done it will be
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jul 27, 2011 14:14:36 GMT -5
Why do people keep saying the same stuff regarding the one and done? If the one and done is killed it will go to 2 and done. Going straight from high school is not coming back. It was bad for the game, bad for teams and bad for executives. Too much risk. I respectfully disagree. As much as they don't want another Kwame Brown debacle, there have got to be just as many if not more owners who want to get the next Lebron (or Dwight Howard, or Kobe, or T-Mac, or whoever) into the league as soon as possible. You can't let the Wizards' mismanagement screw over the NBA forever. The Solomonic solution would be for the NBA to adopt the MLB/NHL model, allowing direct entry by true high school superstars but diverting everyone else into the college ranks for 2-3 years before they become draft-eligible again. This would likely be optimal from the perspective of the middle ranks of the NBPA, the younger veterans and journeymen who could easily be bumped from their roster spot by the low-cost early entrants but aren't in direct competition with the studs who would leap straight from high school. Actually, given the fact that there have been far more busts than stars go straight from high school to the pros, I am gonna think the owners would much rather have more on which to evaluate a kid than his high school performance. There is tremendous pressure on the GM's not to bypass the next Kobe or Lebron, so they give huge contracts to the likes of Kwame to avoid looking foolish down the road. I think almost all would be happy with a rule requiring everybody to wait those 2 years, whcih will result in fewer drafting mistakes. I agree with Bronxie - the owners will push hard for a 2-year rule.
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by IDenj on Jul 28, 2011 9:42:44 GMT -5
The NHL draft is nothing like the other drafts. You get drafted as an 18 year old, and you can play a few months later in the league. 99.9% go back to junior, remain in their country ( Sweden, Finland, Czech ) for a few more years or to the NCAA. The option is there. Most kids in NCAA hockey will never get a sniff of pro, let alone the NHL. In fact many American kids who get drafted and are verbally committed to a school reneg and go the junior hockey route. I think high schoolers should be drafted but can still go to college. Let them enroll, and then when NBA camps open, spend a week there. Let the teams decide if he really is ready. Works for hockey, why can't it work for basketball?
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jul 28, 2011 11:21:51 GMT -5
Can't go to camps or sign contracts and retain elegibility. Many in Junior Hockey are drafted and go onto college for a year or 2 before turning pro. There are many 20-21 yo Freshman hockey players, many of whom, especially american born have gone the prep route for a few years prior to a year or 2 in juniors. Somehow they all find a way to get eligble. I think the numbers of college Hockey players that play professionally or have the opportunity is actually pretty high and on a percentage basis may surpass hoops. Because its not a major sport You don't get the uproarof the numbers of kids that leave to go pro or to play at the Olympics or other national level teams after a year or two. Clearly the NCAA views both sports entirely differently and from my perception for over 20 years has allowed NCAA hockey run like a quasi professional league. I'd personnally go even farther and claim a hint of racism going back 40 years or more regarding admissions, academics clearing house requiremnets and academic progress type issue that are or seem to be over the years not so strictly reviewed. agian just my opinion and i have been away from the game at that level for a few years.
I don't know how or why The NBA would want to go back to multiple rounds of a draft of say 8-10 rounds and maintain rights to the players drafted but not signed. in Hockey you can re-enter the draft if you don't sign and have not turned 21. If you go to college the team reatains your rights until 30 days i believe after you withdraw or graduate from school.. The potential model is just too compicated and ultimately would create more negative problems for the college hoops game.
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,527
|
Post by IDenj on Jul 28, 2011 13:34:30 GMT -5
Sleepy I think you are confusing American junior and major junior A, which are the WHL, OHL and the QMJHL. Once a kid plays in those leagues, kids 16 or 17, they are ineligible for an NCAA scholarship. Those are the high level hockey players. Many kids drafted, either in college or entering it, are considered longer term prospects. The junior you talk about are American junior leagues, where kids play like you said until they are 20 and then spend 4/5 years at an NCAA school. Those leagues aren't anywhere near as good as junior A. If you are serious about hockey, NCAA is not the route many choose. And you can attend pro camps, you just have to pay your own way. Wink, wink, nudge nudge. I know you can't sign a contract and retain eligibility. My point is, say you are Greg Monroe leaving high school. You get drafted by the Pistons, but you register at Gtown. Spend a month here, and then head to Detroit for camp. There they decide to offer you a contract or not. If yes, God bless. If no, you go back to Gtown. The following year Greg signs, Pistons pay the school the value of his scholarship for the year. Call it a developmental fee.
The model used in hockey could almost be carbon copied for basketball.
|
|