Mick Cronin not a fan of one-and-dones
Bill Koch, CIN April 12, 2014


Lance Stephenson was the only UC player under Mick Cronin to leave for the NBA after his freshman year. (Photo: Enquirer file)

During his eight years as the head basketball coach at the University of Cincinnati, Mick Cronin has had only one player who left school after his freshman year for the NBA.

That was Lance Stephenson and it worked out well for him. Stephenson was drafted with the 10th pick in the second round in 2010 by the Indiana Pacers. After two years of languishing on the Pacers' bench, he has developed into a starter and is considered a rising star in the NBA.

Despite Stephenson's success, Cronin is a strong advocate for changing the rule that allows college players to turn pro after one year of college. According to Cronin – a first-year member of the National Association of Basketball Coaches congress – there is almost universal support among college coaches to change the rule. The problem is that there's not much either he or any other coach can do about it except to draw attention to a rule they believe is bad for the college game and in many cases bad for players who leave school before they're ready for the NBA.

The so-called one-and-done rule that requires a player to wait until he's 19 years old and one year out of high school before being eligible for the draft is the NBA's rule, not the NCAA's.

Still, Cronin said he's optimistic the NBA will change the rule now that Adam Silver has replaced David Stern as commissioner. Silver is on record that he favors a 20-year-old eligibility age and said this week that he might even be in favor of having the league subsidize some players financially while they're in college.

NCAA president Mark Emmert has been vocal in his opposition to the current NBA eligibility rule. But raising the age limit in the NBA would have to be approved by the National Basketball Players Association as part of the collective bargaining agreement, which could be a major hurdle.

"Hopefully, it'll change," Cronin said. "We need people in our country to feel better about college basketball. Coaches, although we're overpaid, we do care about our players. We care about academics. That's what we talked about at our convention."

Cronin believes the NBA should make two changes to the rule. If a player wants to turn pro out of high school, he should be allowed to do so. But if he decides to enroll in college, he should be required to spend at least two years in school, similar to baseball, which allows players to turn pro after they finish high school but requires three years of school if they choose to enroll in college before they're again eligible to be drafted.

"In two years you can at least get an associate's degree," Cronin said. "You're part of the campus. Your fans know you're going to be there for two years. It's better for our game. The problem right now with the one-and-done is that it's a charade academically, even if the kid is a good student.

"Lance Stephenson did great (academically)," Cronin said. "He was over 3.0 (grade point average) in his time at Cincinnati, but he wasn't around enough to even be close to an associate's degree."

If a player is required to stay in school for two years, Cronin said, "It gives somebody a goal. Hey, I can at least get my associate's and it puts me closer if I want to finish up some day, if I want to tell my kids I finished up."

On the other end of the spectrum from Stephenson is UC guard Sean Kilpatrick, who spent five years at UC, including a redshirt year as a freshman, and is poised to graduate with a degree in criminal justice after completing a season in which he was named first-team All-American by the Associated Press.

Kilpatrick said this week at UC's basketball banquet that even if he had had the opportunity to leave for the NBA after one year, he wouldn't have taken advantage of it.

"If you're doing the one-and-done situation, you're going into a grown man's league where you don't know nothing," Kilpatrick said. "Your body hasn't developed or you haven't really gained the knowledge to know exactly what you need in order to be on that type of level.

"That's something that hurts a lot of one-and-done players."

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/c...s/7647771/

It would definitely be in the best interests of college basketball to increase the age limit. But this is most certainly another example of a rule that isn't in the best interests of the players, and they have no say because there is no one representing their interests. In this case, the NBAPA's responsibility is to current players. They are in favor of no age limit. But they aren't going to fight hard for it because ultimately their primary responsibility is to their players. And they lost pretty badly in the last round of negotiations so it only makes sense they wouldn't fight for something that doesn't pertain to them (in fact it probably saves current players jobs).

Unfortunately it doesn't seem like the professional sports leagues in our country are subject to our anti-trust laws. And because they negotiate with a players union, it has stood up in the courts. Because it doesn't make sense to not allow an adult in this country the right to work.

Also, the idea that players aren't ready for the NBA at 18 is factually false. Something like 41 of 46 players in the NBA that went straight out of high school went on to be at least rotation players in the NBA. That is an absurd hit rate in a process that has a lot of uncertainty. And if a team doesn't think players are ready, they don't have to draft them. Of course they will draft them because those players are the best talents.

But the NBA doesn't want the expense of player development. So they pass it onto the colleges. Not sure that is a a smart business strategy because it supports a competitor. Basketball is on pretty much every night of the week. The two sports are fighting over a lot of viewers. Helping a competitor out doesn't seem to smart to me. At best it seems to negate the saved cost of player development.

But the idea that players need college to develop doesn't make sense to me and has been proven to not apply to many players. What other walk of life would anyone make an argument that the best method of professional development isn't to sharpen your tools against the best of the best?

I agree that one-and-dones are bad. There's absolutely nothing wrong with these kids spending a year or two in Europe. It's a lot better for the kids and a lot better for college sports.

One and dones are bad for college bball. But it's not fair that you have to goto college, sit out a year, or go to Europe before you can play in the NBA. But I like college ball way more than the NBA, so I am selfish when I say I wish there was a way to keep the talent in college longer.

well I'd take some more one and done's in a heartbeat....

I'd favor allowing high school players the opportunity to jump right to the NBA, but those that choose the college route be made to finish three years of college before being draft eligible.

Right now I'd say I favor the one-and-done and here’s why. I’m guessing but I’d say that currently there is maybe 7 one and done players every year. And of those players, UC is getting roughly 1 every 8 years. Since 1991 when UC became relevant again in basketball, Dontonio Wingfield, Demarr Johnson, and Lance Stephenson were one-and-done. That’s 3 in 23 years.

So this rule has very very little effect on UC. This rule only significantly helps Kentucky, Kansas, Duke and maybe 2 or 3 other schools that get the upper elite players every year. So why do I want those schools to get better where UC stays the same.

They should just let kids go pro again straight out of HS IMO. Either that or let them go directly from HS into a developmental league in Europe.

(04-14-2014 10:13 AM)Marcus Wrote:  They should just let kids go pro again straight out of HS IMO. Either that or let them go directly from HS into a developmental league in Europe.

The NBA owners do not want this because then they have to start scouting high schools again, which is much more difficult than just scouting the colleges.

A development league makes a lot more sense from the NBA owners point of view.

(04-14-2014 10:48 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:13 AM)Marcus Wrote:  They should just let kids go pro again straight out of HS IMO. Either that or let them go directly from HS into a developmental league in Europe.

The NBA owners do not want this because then they have to start scouting high schools again, which is much more difficult than just scouting the colleges.

A development league makes a lot more sense from the NBA owners point of view.

I'd be fine with a developmental league for sure. Anything to get these one and done guys out of college basketball.

(04-14-2014 06:56 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  Right now I'd say I favor the one-and-done and here’s why. I’m guessing but I’d say that currently there is maybe 7 one and done players every year. And of those players, UC is getting roughly 1 every 8 years. Since 1991 when UC became relevant again in basketball, Dontonio Wingfield, Demarr Johnson, and Lance Stephenson were one-and-done. That’s 3 in 23 years.

So this rule has very very little effect on UC. This rule only significantly helps Kentucky, Kansas, Duke and maybe 2 or 3 other schools that get the upper elite players every year. So why do I want those schools to get better where UC stays the same.

You are probably right. I think theme media and others just make too much out if.

The one and dones just seem wrong. Especially when you watch a team like Kentucky, where the entire starting lineup will never finish their second semester at the school. Plus they have a bench with "players" who never see teh floor, whose entire purpose appears to be to keep the team's APR score up.

I'd rather the kids be allowed to skip college altogether than be able to make a semester and a half mockery of it.

(04-14-2014 11:53 AM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  The one and dones just seem wrong. Especially when you watch a team like Kentucky, where the entire starting lineup will never finish their second semester at the school. Plus they have a bench with "players" who never see teh floor, whose entire purpose appears to be to keep the team's APR score up.

I'd rather the kids be allowed to skip college altogether than be able to make a semester and a half mockery of it.

Completely agree. Colleges exist to educate, I hate the idea of making a kid pretend he cares about education for 6 months.

(04-14-2014 10:13 AM)Marcus Wrote:  They should just let kids go pro again straight out of HS IMO. Either that or let them go directly from HS into a developmental league in Europe.

I favor the baseball rule where if you're good enough you can go straight to the pros. If you go to college you're making a commitment to play 2-3 years.