Cross-Over

My opinion on those reasons:

1.) I know of only one player who has been a distraction with trying spectacular dunks at akward times, and thats Ricky Davis of the Celtics. Otherwise, its a efficent play that is part of the game. I dont think their is an abundance of them, and its only one of numerous types of ways to score.

2.) Some teams were horrible defensively, the majority mediocre, and a few ( San Antonio, Indiana, Detroit, and Houston) very good defensively. Zone defenses have made it more interesting, but no single team used it primarly. In college though, the majority of teams do. Ever thought why? In the NBA you have ball handlers who can penetrate all day against a zone, and every team has at least one very good outside shooter who will make you pay for sagging in. In addition to the fact the fact that NBA players are older and play a lot more games than college kids, is why I think a lot of people misinterpret pro players as lazy/ not giving effort.

3.) Rich? All NBA players sure are, they have the higher league minimum salary (small rosters) than the NHL, MLB, and NFL. Loudmouth? There are a good amount who are, but I think only a handful are to a detriment. Practice less? I have only heard of one player who had a problem with practicing.

I think one reason that there is an exaggeration about issues like you mentioned is that rostersare so small, and everything a player does is big news.


I think that every player coming into the league should have to at least spend two years in college. Players can obviously come in and contribute with less exeperience than that (Lebron, Carmello, Marbury), but there are numerous more who have came in early and can not (Outlaw, Ebi, Stevenson, Bender). It is, so to speak, watering down the league. These types of players make the level of play worse. Furthermore, with short term contracts for rookies, teams pay big and help the highschoolers develop, and sometimes aren't able to resign (or chose not to because of what they have seen) them once they are capable.

Its very difficult to judge young talent. There is no way in hell that Kobe Bryant should have been drafted 13. After two years in college, a bad team should have got him number 1.

The Wizards should have been able to draft Kwame after two years in college with the first pick, and he proved it. Same with Tyson Chandler at the number two pick that year to the Bulls.

It is fair for teams to have to essentially guess with a lot of players in the draft, and is it fair to those players to not be able to dominate and blossom at the college level?

I don't think so.

Are we maybe throwing some to the wolves too early, and in return not always getting what could have been?

I think it has and will continue to happen in some situations.

This is what I think is best for the NBA, not the recently graduated high school kids. In a low income situation I think it would be extremely difficult to pass up on guaranteed millions.

I also think that the NCAA should at least give players a stipend, but thats a seperate arguement.


I agree with you about the charging rule, though many players utilize it well, I saw a drastic increase in what I consider bullshit charge calls all throughout the NBA this past year.