The NBPA supported a modified version of Silver’s plan, pushing to instate a “zero-and-two” rule like the one that exists in MLB. That rule would allow players to declare for the draft out of high school, but they must stay in school for two years if they do go to college.
I feel like this would've been a really interesting rule.
I've suggested this for years now, but why not have the ability to draft kids straight out of HS, but require them to play at least 1 year in the DL or a minimum 2 years in college? If they decided to go the DL route, NBA teams would have controlled environments of how they're able to develop the HS guys. If they choose the college route instead, then they get more time to develop
and get a real opportunity to get their college experience and education at the same time.
I think it would be a W-W for everyone around... mostly due to the developmental aspect. Of course, Calipari would not be happy though.
I'm not a big DL watcher, but I'm very happy about this:
Currently, top-rated Development League players make $26,000, with the lower-tiered guys netting $19,000. But D-League salaries for players on two-way contracts are expected to more than double into the $50,000-to-$75,000 range,
per ESPN’s Marc Stein, making the league more competitive with overseas salaries.
One thing I feel like is a problem in the NBA is the "locking up" of young prospects. If you get drafted onto a team in the 1st round, that team has control of you for 4 years. At the end of the 4 years, you'll be a RFA. If you want
out, you'll have to take their QO and remain on a team for 1 year before you can be a UFA. I just don't think this is a good option for NBA players. It definitely benefit the teams more.
I think a good half-way point is that if the home team wants to match a RFA offer, let the agent and player decide if they want to be matched for that same amount. If not, I'd give them the power to cut down the years by half.
Instead of 4 years $80million, the player could decide on 2years $40million instead.