Young Whipper Snappers

Right off the bat, let me disclose that this is an expansion of Kevin Blackistone's comments on Around the Horn this afternoon.

Blackistone made a 30-second argument against forcing high school studs to play at least one year in college. I had not heard a convincing argument for this point until today. The most Blackistone could get out in 30 seconds was that we are 'wasting' scholarships on one-year players. Without sufficient time to explain himself, I think his argument was not accepted by the other "experts." But KB, I gotch'ya. In those 30 seconds you flipped me from one side of the debate to the other. Let me explain what I think he was trying to get at...

One-year freshman like Oden, Durant, Rose and Mayo are definitely better for the game of basketball, but they're not better for college basketball. No matter how much we let academics fall by the wayside, these are still student-athletes. Colleges' first concern should be education; athletic entertainment should be secondary at best.

So imagine a world where players are not forced to go to college for at least a year (the same world where Saddam Hussein is still alive and Al Gore was still just a former veep). Are there magically going to be other super-talented players to step in, go to college for one year, and go to the NBA? Of course not. If you take away the top talent, the overall talent level drops. This is why it would be bad for the game itself. BUT, that means that those super freshmans' scholarships would not go to freshman who would have otherwise been minor headlines (I'm sure Zuch could fill us in on a bunch of great freshman that would not have been NBA prospects, who got scholarships anyway). Those extra scholarships would go to the guys who just missed getting a scholarship. The guys who may not be able to afford college without those scholarships. The guys who would have rode the bench, but would have gotten an education in the process.

When you have a finite amount of positions (like available D-I scholarships) if you add contestants at any level, the people at the bottom of the totum pole get knocked off. And too often those are the people that really need the scholarships.

So there you go. If you enjoy watching Kevin Love, OJ Mayo and Derik Rose play college hoops, you should feel guilty because somewhere out there are three kids who can't afford to go to college and will probably end up in a homeless shelter, and you are personally responsible for that because you enjoy watching talented freshman. You selfish bastard!

Read more...

Make your pick: Oden or Durant

The NFL season is over. Opening day is still 50 days away. The NBA is not in the playoffs yet, and therefore is not all that interesting.

We need something to discuss (you know, beside gay athletes and new head coaches...yawn). So I'm writing this post in hopes of getting some debate on one of the hottest current topics in sports.

It's like asking "Wade or LeBron?" Either way, you're going to be fine, but the debate is there. Through Wednesday, here are the college standouts' stats:
Oden - 15.4 pts, 9.5 boards, 3.7 blocks, 62% shooting
Durant - 25.4 pts, 11.6 boards, 1.9 blocks, 49% shooting

I'm going to make my case for Oden, but I'm not completely sold so if you think Durant is a better prospect, convince me. Just remember, Sir Charles is on my side. I'm not going to make a ten-point argument or even a five-point argument. I really only have two points to make, so here they are.

One: Oden is playing with one hand...one fucking hand. Now, losing your dominant hand in basketball is not going to have the same effect of, say, making Albert Pujols bat left-handed. And it's not like his right hand is tied behind his back. But how many players could put up respectable numbers with a cast on their dominant hand? (and Oden's numbers are much better than "respectable") Oden's most impressive stat might be his 60% free throw shooting. Even with his left-handed toss, he's shooting better than most dominant big men like Shaq or Ewing. Just remember, we haven't even seen Oden at 100% yet.

Two: There are a lot of NBA players from the past decade that were better basketball players than Shaq, but only Jordan was more dominant. As Barkley said this afternoon on PTI, players with Durants skills are available every couple years, if not every year. Great big men are rare, and when you get one that can dominate the way Oden can, it can change the entire game. Having a giant in the paint forces teams to take more jump shots, and NBA players don't like to take jump shots. Look at the difference Shaq makes in Miami, or Ben Wallace makes in Chicago (or the effect on Detroit of losing Big Ben). I wouldn't say that players like Durant are a dime a dozen, but there are a lot more Kevin Durants out there than Greg Odens.

Ok, time for you to sound off...

Read more...