Gotta Serve Somebody

New Orleans Hornets coach Byron Scott was fired yesterday after a disappointing 3-6 start. Notably, Scott won the the NBA's Coach of the Year award just 18 months ago in April of 2008, after a successful 56-win season that ended with the team just one victory away from the conference finals.

The Coach of the Year award appears to be "jinxed" much like Sports Illustrated cover photos; winners of the COTY seem to lose their jobs within a couple years.

• 2000: Doc Rivers wins, then is fired by Orlando in November 2003
• 2001: Larry Brown wins, then resigns from Philly in June '03
• 2002: Rick Carlisle wins, then is fired by Detroit in May 2003
• 2003: Gregg Popovich wins – the only true exception to my rule
• 2004: Hubie Brown wins, then resigns from Memphis in Nov. '04
• 2005: Mike D'Antoni wins, then resigns / is fired in May 2008
• 2006: Avery Johnson wins, then is fired in May 2008
• 2007: Sam Mitchell wins, then is fired in December 2008
• 2008: Byron Scott wins, then is fired in November 2009
• 2009: Mike Brown wins (and there is no shortage of demands for his ouster)

Of the eight coaches above who lost their jobs, the average time between their COTY award and their job termination was about 23 months.

For the eight teams represented by those eight coaches, the average drop-off in regular-season victories from the COTY season to the following season was about 4 fewer wins. (For this calculation I referred to this Google Docs spreadsheet that I created for an earlier analysis back in June.)

Perhaps this jinx is tied to the criteria for the award. Rather than rewarding coaches who help excellent teams stay excellent, or help pitiful teams avoid the cellar, the award voters usually vote for coaches who helped mediocre teams become good. But teams with mediocre talent are not likely to exceed expectations two or three years in a row; thus, when the team's "true" ability becomes apparent, the coach looks to be at fault for no longer finding the lipstick to put on that pig.

Byron Scott took over as New Orleans coach before the 2004-05 season, meaning that he's already completed five full go-rounds with the team. As such, he was one of the NBA's longer-tenured coaches, tied with Mike Woodson and Doc Rivers and trailing only Lawrence Frank, Phil Jackson (if you consider him as continuously employed by the Lakers since 1999), Gregg Popovich, and Jerry Sloan. Scott will surely find employment soon enough; who would resist a man with 82 suits in his wardrobe? (I am unsure of whether he intentionally chose that number so he could pick a different suit for each day of the season.)

BS Report

Despite this review, I just ordered Bill Simmons' latest: The Book of Basketball.

(Also picked up David Halberstam's The Breaks of the Game based on reviews.)

Celtics Creaming Opponents

Yesterday I had the pleasure of watching the Jazz vs. Celtics at the TD Banknorth Garden.



As a ticket purchaser, the game was quite uninteresting. There was no drama, and the win was effortless for the Celts. Wish I had gotten tickets to a better game.

As a Celts fan, the win was amazing. The Celts didn't even break a sweat in surgically dismantling the Jazz, who I thought were a good team. It seems like the turnovers came to get them in the end, but still with a starting lineup of Okur, Williams, Boozer, Brewer, and AK, the Jazz have no excuses to get destroyed as they did.

Three points:

1) The Celts look incredibly balanced. Offensive production from every starter, and from those off the bench. Despite my qualms that Rasheed was slowly evolving into an Antoine Walker jack-up-threes-even-though-I-am-almost-7-feet-tall-and-should-be-posting-up clone, he didn't look half bad (at least his play wasn't half bad; not sure what to say about that growing gut.)

I also have to give him some credit as he appeared more than comfortable coming off the bench (contrast: Allen Iverson). Plus he had some nice new tats.

2) I didn't appreciate how good Paul Millsap could potentially be until seeing him live. If I were a betting man, the Jazz should bet their future on him over Carlos Boozer.

3) I was reminded by one of my friends at the game about some of the well known AK-47 stories. The one I had forgotten was when AK started crying about not getting enough minutes. My friend claimed that AK-47 had the highest salary to skill ratio of any player in the league. Kenyon Martin has a good claim to that list as well.

Hoyas, Oh Boya!

Georgetown is typically thought of as having one of the strongest basketball programs in the NCAA. They have had a number of good players, but with the recent implosion of Allen Iverson down in Memphis, I started to think about whether G-town has produced any really great players.

Some would say that Iverson is a really great player, but given his recent antics it is probably safer to say he was a great player. He has aged like a fancy bottle of wine that has been corked. So much potential, such a disaster. My current feeling towards him is pure disappointment.

But what about the others? Here is the list from the top of my head:

Othella Harrington
Ruben Boumtje-Boumtje
Jahidi White
Roy Hibbert
Dikembe Mutombo
Alonzo Mourning
Patrick Ewing, Jr.
Jeff Green
Paul Tagliabue (former NFL commish)

and of course the best player on the list

Patrick Ewing

I used to like Ewing when I was younger, but after his famous strip club incident, I started to like him less. (I'm sure some of my fellow bloggers might say they liked him more after this incident. What do you say, Bhel?)

Patrick Ewing is the first G-Town player of the modern era to make the NBA Hall of Fame. Even though I admire Alonzo's story, I suspect Ewing will remain the only one for quite some time. It seems like the lights are dim for A. I.

My Father Was A Gambler Down In Georgia

Tonight Brad Miller hit a spectacular Derek Fisher-style catch-and-release shot with three-tenths of a second remaining, which shot apparently would have elevated his Chicago Bulls to a one-point victory over Denver. The referees called the shot good on the floor, but reversed their decision after extensive video review. Thus, the Nuggets escaped with a 90-89 win. [Update: on Wednesday the NBA league office confirmed that the referees made the correct call.]

I had the good fortune to be in attendance at this game. I have seen many live basketball games in my life, but I have never before witnessed such a sudden tumult of emotions in such a short span. After a thrilling fourth quarter, the Bulls managed to tie the game with 10 seconds left on two Derrick Rose free throws, and the whole gym was thinking of overtime. The place was rocking; the plump gent to my left and the kind father behind my back both wanted to exchage high-fives with me. But then when Chauncey Billups drew a foul (on a clearly-done and thick-headed whack from Kirk Hinrich with 0.6 seconds remaining) and fans slowly grasped that their men would lose, the effect was like that of 20,000 children on Christmas morning realizing that Santa overslept and failed to fill the stocking.

As the Bulls prepared to inbound the ball at 0.3 seconds, half the crowd was tottering on concrete stairways, making for the exits. My friends asked if we could leave too, but I said: "No, if the Bulls make this shot, we can tell our grandchildren in fifty years that we were there when the Bulls beat the Nuggets!" My vantage point was behind the Bulls’ basket, so I couldn't quite see what happened as Miller received the pass and flung up a set shot. But when a thunderous cry radiated upward through the arena bowl, I knew that yes, I would have that tale for the little Bhels. My friends and I felt exhilarated.

For several minutes thereafter each squad huddled near its respective bench; we soon inferred that the referees needed to review this play on video. Joakim Noah, caught on camera during this nervous time, patted Brad Miller's head and grinned, seemingly confident that the play would stand. Meanwhile, Chauncey Billups looked cool as ice. (How could both squads both be so confident? In an imminent post, possibly tomorrow, I will explore the issue of over-optimism among ballers.) Naturally, the Chicago scoreboard operator showed the tally as Chicago 91, Denver 90, hoping that such facts on the ground (or facts in the sky) could help to establish some finality for the home side.

After a while, the arena announcer told us the answer: "The referees have ruled the shot no good. Thank you for coming, everyone!" That Chicago lost the game was left for us to figure out. Stunned, we walked out into a chilly autumnal evening. Folks around us uttered vile insults revolving around the word "nuggets".

Here is the video of tonight's game, including Miller's crazy shot:

In a way this night was like Election Day of 2000, nine years ago: Gore took Florida! No, Bush took Florida! No, we're heading for a recount! There are few athletic settings where apparent outcomes can switch so fast. The best recent example I can think is last February's Super Bowl, in which the Cardinals completed a thrilling comeback with a go-ahead touchdown at 2:58 of the fourth quarter ... and then Pittsburgh came right back with a winning touchdown at 0:35. With the potential for rapid scoring, football can hold your heart in a martini glass and shake it real good ... but basketball does this even better.

Understand Your Man

On Thursday November 5th, (i) Sacramento mayor and former NBA All-Star point guard Kevin Johnson and (ii) Washington DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee announced that they are engaged to be married. (I have always been skeptical of too much pomp and circumstance over engagements; viewing a marriage as a merger, an engagement is merely an agreement to agree, and we know those don't always work out. My colleague EarlDaGoat also opined recently on a baller's broken plans to wed. But seriously, I do wish Johnson and Rhee all the best.)

As a child, I admired KJ; he was my second-favorite point guard after Isiah, the people's champ of my home town. I certainly rooted hard for Phoenix when they opposed Chicago in the '93 Finals. Yet recently Johnson's integrity has looked mushier than before; a federal investigation found that his nonprofit organization in Sacramento mis-used hundreds of thousands of dollars of AmeriCorps grant money, which misuse included car washes for Johnson's personal vehicles. (I invite you to read more details about the story at this Wall Street Journal link, this New York Times link, and this Washington Examiner link.) The wrongdoing occurred before Johnson was elected in November 2008. Earlier this year, President Obama fired the AmeriCorps Inspector General, Gerald Walpin, who was causing trouble by pushing for Johnson, and possibly the city of Sacramento, to be barred from receiving AmeriCorps funds. Ironically, Obama may have violated a federal law regarding inspector generals** that he sponsored as a Senator.

Obama thinks of himself as the first basketball president, so it is not surprising that he would support Johnson. Also, Sacramento's ability to receive federal funds was important for the Recovery Act i.e. "stimulus package" passed earlier this year.

Ms. Rhee, who like me, Bhel Atlantic, is a former Teach For America member, is a real character herself. She posed for this photo below for the December 8, 2008 cover of Time Magazine, and then later claimed she didn't realize the pic would offend people. Note to Ms. Rhee, if you made that comment in good faith: Never suggest that you are considering firing every one of your employees.

** I know the preferred declension is "inspectors general", but that sounds stuffy to me. Adjectives are supposed to come first in English.

Wouldn't Take Nothing For My Journey Now

When we began this blog last year, I identified a principal objective to be an assault on unfair refereeing. Heck, our very URL suggests that we don't like "star calls". Hence, I was really quite overjoyed at the finish of last night's Bulls-Cavs game. Watch the video for yourself (fast-forward to the 2:26 mark). LeBron James drives to the hoop with 4 seconds left, down by one point.

I applaud the referees for not calling a foul against Noah or Deng. However, a more egregious depredation occurred on the same play. Watch carefully: after James gathers his dribble, he takes one step, then a hop with both feet. Then he hops again and, in mid-air, attempts to put the ball in the hoop. No travelling call?!

In Memory Of Earl Manigault

Exactly 11.5 years ago to this day, society lost one of the great ballers to ever grace the Earth.

I realize that many of my fellow bloggers and readers may not know who Earl "Da Goat" Manigault is. He is my namesake.

He was arguably the best baller that ever lived with an unmatched quickness and a 52" vertical jump. He was better than Kareem, then Lew Alcindor, back in the day. One of the main reasons people remember Da Goat was the movie Rebound. This is when I first came across his story.

Here is an obit from the New York Times.

Best Basketball Movies of All Time

When I was 14 or 15 years old, I was introduced to a musical genius who would come to define my youth: R. Kelly.

Kelly sang the theme song to Space Jam, "I believe I can fly." Mixing animation and real footage, Space Jam was forgettable, but the song prompts me to ask a question: What have been the best basketball movies of all time?

The conventional answer, the easy answer, is Hoosiers.

I like one better: Blue Chips.

Blue Chips captured some of the flavor of college basketball in the early 1990s. Outrageous recruiting efforts and the tension between going college and going pro are both all well characterized in the film. Nolte's anger and the moral high-ground he assumes make for outsanding drama.

Thanks to HBO--I've seen the film at least a half dozen times...and it's still enjoyable.

Some other good ones: "Final Shot: The Hank Gathers Story," "Coach Carter," "White Men Can't Jump." Not sure I can think of many others. Dikembe Mutumbo had one produced by Disney...that had memorable commercials...but never really made much of an impact.

What are your thoughts, fellow bloggers and readers?

These are our heroes...

Thinking a bit more about Limbaugh's comments on the NBA and "hip hop culture," I was motivated to remember some hip hop songs which mention the NBA or its players.

One example I've already linked to is Nelly's It's Hot in Herre:

"I gotta friend with a pole in the basement, what?
I'm just kid like Jason"

Or there is Jay-Z's song Encore when he says:

"I am the Michael Jordan of recording"

These two examples are offhand references which might not have required too much thought. One could say this also applies to attempts by NBA players to rap such as Shaq Fu, C. Webb, Jewelz (aka Allen Iverson), Ron-Ron Artest, and (by far the worst) Kobe Bryant.

Given the Kobe reference, I would be amiss to forget perhaps the most elaborate NBA reference in Nas's classic song These are our heroes:

"Uh, Massa used to breed us to be bigger to go play
Athletes of today in the NBA, make me proud
But there's somethin' they don't say
Keep gettin' accused for abusin' White pussay
From OJ to Kobe, uh let's call him Tobe
First he played his life cool just like Michael
Now he rock ice too just like I do
Yo, you can't do better than that?
The hotel clerk who adjusts the bathroom mat?
Now you lose sponsorships that you thought had your back
Yeah, you beat the rap jiggaboo, fake nigga you
You turn around then you shit on Shaq
Who woulda knew, Mr. Goodie-Two-Shoes
He love a little butt crack, got enough cash
Little kids with they bus pass who look up to you
To do something for the youth, stupid spoof
But you let them use you as an example
They would rep, but our heroes got they hands full"

The Real RJ Story

So last night Richard Jefferson finally had a break out night with the Spurs (even though it was overshadowed by a batty incident) scoring 21 points. One of the intriguing stories to watch this season is whether RJ will push the Spurs over the top this year before the rest of the team croaks because of old age.

But perhaps the more intriguing story with RJ, the son of Christian missionaries, is the story from this summer when he pulled the plug on a wedding to dancer Kesha Ni'Cole Nichols two hours before the ceremony.

At least he was legit enough to give his boys the AMEX for the night to make up for it. (He also allegedly gave Ni'Cole a very legit payday to make amends.)

Upon reading this story I came away with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I feel bad for the humiliation that the girl suffered and it seems that RJ did not carry himself with any class. On the other hand, I'm sure RJ had his reasons and probably better to opt out earlier rather than later. Indeed, one could make the case that aside from the humiliation, both sides might even be better off: RJ without making a mistake, and Ni'Cole given the payday.

My most conflicted feelings come from whether this should shape my impression of RJ as a player. One might say, let his game speak for itself, but it is impossible for me to separate this story from whether he is able to take the Spurs to the finals. But come the spring, I might be singing a different tune.

I suppose the same issues apply to a Mister Robert Sylvester Kelly.

Too-Tall Jones, Nay, Grewal

Today's Toronto Star features a story about two Punjabi-speaking broadcasters who have been calling hockey games for the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) and now will begin a regular gig calling Toronto Raptors games. Bringing in new fans is unequivocally good for the NBA, of course. My co-bloggers imagine me to be a staunchly Tancredo-voting conservative, but I support this kind of development.

Last January, I ruminated on why so few (viz., zero) men of Punjabi background have made it to the big leagues of basketball, despite their unusual height. Obviously there are plenty of tall children of Punjabi immigrants in North America who have no problem following the Association and aspiring to be the Jordan of their driveway skirmishes. However, they all want to be doctors, so they may be a lost cause. This new CBC service could help to make basketball the new "it" sport of north India. As I indicated in the third comment on this post from Saturday, Commissioner Stern needs to find a way to market hoops to the cricket-crazed people of South Asia. Ironically, the great Punjabi hope may be in mother Bharat and not here Stateside; given that the returns to education are so much greater here, tall people with athletic potential in India are less likely to be tempted by the traditional professions.

Conservatives and the NBA

Reading some of the reactions to the discussion on the NBA age limit below, it feels like it's getting hot in herre.

So much so that it reminded me of an evening switching back and forth between Fox News (read: Mr. B. Atlantic) and MSNBC (read: the rest of the bloggers here).

Based on these numbers, the blog might appear unbalanced, so to give Mr. B. Atlantic some help I dug out an old quote from (a possible ally?) Rush Limbaugh about the NBA.

LIMBAUGH: There is something about this hip-hop culture business. I'm not going to mention the name because there's thousands of them, but I've been watching interviews with ex-NBA players and current NBA players.

LIMBAUGH: This is the hip-hop culture on parade. This is gang behavior on parade minus the guns. That's the culture that the NBA has become. So if anybody will be honest with you about it in the NBA, and a very few will have the courage to, because saying what I just said is going to be tagged as racist, but I, my friends, am fearless when it comes to this because the truth will out, and that's what's happening here, and part and parcel of this gang culture, this hip-hop culture, is: "I'm not going to tolerate being dissed."

I wonder what would happen if Limbaugh tried to buy an NBA team...

Roids and the NBA

I was flipping through the Boston Globe website recently trying to gather intelligence on the BB Davis situation and came across an interesting piece here about the role of medical professionals in administering steroids in the MLB.


Although the allegations of steroids in the NBA have come nowhere close to those in MLB, they did merit a congressional hearing (mostly overrun with denials), an uproar over failed tests by Rashard Lewis, Lindsay Hunter, and Soumalia Samake, and the issue continues to hum just below the radar given other problems the league faces.

Despite this limited attention, I'm left wondering how do we know for sure that steroids are not a big problem in the NBA? Are we to believe that the NBA players are somehow much better than their colleagues in other professional sports?

Unsurprisingly, my opinion on the matter became more cynical after reading Massa Stern's blanket denial of the problem. Seems like there must be something underneath this.

NBA Age Minimum Redux

Buzz Bussinger's provocative piece in the NY Times, "Bring Back Basketball's Little Big Men", has already generated considerable buzz on this blog. I have been disturbed to read Bhel Atlantic's defense of Commissioner Stern's proposal to raise the NBA age minimum again -- this time to 20. For reasons mentioned below by my colleague Earl Da Goat, the age minimum smacks of paternalism and should be scrapped -- not raised.

I make three additional observations:

1. Who does David Stern think he is? Raising the age minimum is cruel to high school players who have the skill and desire to make the jump to the NBA. Many pro athletes come from poverty and have worked harder than Commissioner Stern can fathom to get to the point where they can take care of their families. For no good reason, the age minimum deprives these kids of their just rewards. One may argue that their opportunity to play in the NBA isn't denied -- just deferred. But let's not forget that every competitive basketball player risks a career-ending injury every time s/he steps on the floor. Commissioner Stern needs to realize that he is not the Great White Father of NBA players: he is an administrator. He should stick to hawking NBA merchandise in Europe and China rather than trying to play Daddy to a group of remarkable young athletes with whom he shares little.

2. Forcing athletes to go to college against their will doesn't help them. Don't get me wrong: I'm all for student-athletes going to college, getting an education and preparing for life after pro sports. But this is -- and ought to remain -- their choice.

Part of my revulsion for forcing athletes to attend college is because Division I NCAA sports are already exploitative. College athletes generate millions of dollars in revenues for their respective schools but are not allowed to be compensated. In light of this, forcing players to attend college smacks of indentured servitude.

Mr. Atlantic seems to think that NBA players will learn to behave like gentlemen if they go to college. He laments the high number of NBA players who father children out of wedlock and suggests that college will somehow teach them not to have sex with groupies. (I guess UNLV alum Larry Johnson skipped that class.). First, there does not seem to be any correlation between going to college and fathering out-of-wedlock children. Second, the suggestion that the NBA should be in the business of preaching abstinence and family values to its players is highly problematic. It is neither Mr. Atlantic's nor Commissioner Stern's business if NBA players have children out of wedlock. There is nothing illegal about it, and many men who never get married are excellent fathers. I am further curious about what other life skills Mr. Atlantic thinks the NBA should be teaching its young players -- classes on cleanliness? The notion that the NBA needs to civilize its players is downright offensive.

And even if you think that pro athletes need to learn some manners, it's not clear that college is the place to learn. Many players are more spoiled in college than they will be in the NBA. (In the NBA, there are no college coaches or university administrators to conceal who wrote your SATs or hide your drug abuse.)

3. The other supposed benefits of the age minimum are trivial. Bhel Atlantic is a smart guy but even he is struggled to identify the supposed benefits on an NBA age minimum. He argues that the NBA suffers if high school players can enter the draft: because nobody wants to miss out on drafting the next Kobe or KG, NBA teams draft "projects" right out of high school, some of whom will never amount to anything. Poor NBA owners and executives. So NBA scouts will have to get better at their job. Given the downside to the age minimum, that's a burden we should all be willing to live with.

The Best Is Yet To Come

Towards the end of Game 1 of the World Series a couple nights ago, commentator Tim McCarver noted that the Phillies had augmented a 2-0 lead to 6-0, with two runs in the top half of the eighth inning and two more runs in the top of the ninth. McCarver suggested that "Teams lose a lot of games because of tack-on runs." I found this analysis a bit quizzical. Sure, teams lose a lot of games by allowing runs late. But teams also lose games by allowing runs early. And allowing runs in the fifth inning ain't so good for ya, either. Apparently a baseball purist is to believe that no team worth its salt should be allowing runs late in games; perhaps the presence of an all-fastball-hurling relief pitcher like Mariano Rivera, who didn't even get on the mound that night, means that average runs-per-inning decreases later in the game. [I have looked on Google but cannot find statistics on average runs per inning in each of the 9 innings, aggregating all MLB games.] But why are these late runs by a leading team deemed so embarrassing or so illegitimate?

Presumably offensive players in baseball are slightly less motivated with a lead than they are while playing from behind; defensive players are more motivated when their team is behind. (But if the gap in the score is huge, offensive players and defensive players playing from behind could be demoralized and reduce their effort.) Perhaps we should be critical of the Yankees for allowing those late runs, but it hardly means that their performance was grossly negligent. The same dynamics likely govern in basketball, also.

Back in the NBA, one game I consider archetypal is Game 7 of the Orlando-Boston second-round series from last May. The Magic led by only five points after three quarters, and the whole Garden crowd was totally jacked to see the home side pound Orlando in the fourth quarter for a thrilling comeback. Instead, Orlando scored 11 unanswered points in the first two minutes of the fourth, and then their stifling defense convinced Boston that the decision was locked. Now, can we say that Boston lost because they got lackadaisacal for those two minutes? Were those 11 points equivalent to McCarver's "tack-on runs"? Alternatively, we might say that Orlando proved in those two minutes that they are the better team. Sometimes teams prove their superiority in the first quarter; Orlando proved it in the fourth. (Objectively, it would have been surprising if the Celtics, missing their defensive leader Garnett, had taken the series.) Additionally, let us consider the season debut of the Timberwolves on Wednesday night. The Timberwolves overcame a 16-point deficit with under 7 minutes to play, eventually edging New Jersey 95-93 with a emergency shot at the buzzer by Damien Wilkins. Predictably, Nets-oriented bloggers called the outcome a "punch in the gut". The Nets choked, in the usual vernacular. But it's more likely that this burst of performance from Minnesota evinced their superiority to New Jersey (at least on that night); perhaps New Jersey's ability to mount a 16-point edge was the real fluke.

Two Roads Diverged In A Yellow Wood

Inter alia, the 2008-09 NBA season saw two remarkable streaks: Cleveland won 39 of its first 40 home games (before dropping a meaningless finale by one point in overtime with bench players seeing the most court time) and Jose Calderon made an NBA-record 151 of 154 free throws. After two nights of this season, Cleveland is 0-2 (0-1 at home) and Calderon is shooting 60% on his free throws, having missed two of five.

Flipped coins don't have a memory of the prior flip, and so the probability of a given outcome (heads, say) is constant over time and independent of whatever happened earlier. Five heads in a row? Your chance of another head is still 50%. Yet athletic outcomes surely are not like that. Success breeds confidence and good habits, which breed more success; alternatively, an eternally wowing streak like 98 percent free-throw completion might weigh mentally and make a man more nervous. Clearly with Cleveland and Calderon, the positive-feedback side dominated last year. Yet in the season's first bounces, these guys collapsed on the metrics wherein they kicked butt in 08-09. That truly is surprising; their "memory" is now amnesiac. Much like children who have no books during summer vacation, basketball players apparently forget what made them great while they slumber in July and August.

Stern Apologists

I couldn't avoid being provoked by the attempted defense of Massa Stern by my colleague, Mr. B. Atlantic.

Even if you are in favor of the age limit, Mr. Atlantic's response reeks of paternalism and elitism. I suppose Mr. Atlantic's perspective is obvious given his off-hand (and perhaps unneeded) reference to coordination failures on Wall Street (or as some would say, Wall Cheat). But I wonder why the other side thinks that NBA players can't take care of themselves, and perhaps more importantly, why those players who are not on Mr. Atlantic's Eight Fold Path would be remedied by being forced to go to college for one year.

First, the elitism and tinges of racism. I'd be curious to know Mr. Atlantic: how many of these high school to pro players are coming from "rusty gyms in the Mississippi"? Indeed, what fraction of the players affected by the age limit are white? Even in percentage terms, this policy surely differentially hurts the African-American players.

Second, the analysis rests on shoddy counterfactual reasoning. I'm not convinced that LBJ, Howard and Ellis would have behaved any differently had they been forced to go to college. I could easily have imagined it the other way. Atlantic seems to forget the other iron law of unintended consequences. The policy leads to players going to Europe until they turn 19. Does he expect the players to get counseling on condom use on the French Riviera?

Finally, and most importantly, why is forcing someone to go to college for one year the best way to help someone get on the right track? That is, why doesn't the NBA provide more services for these young players, such as someone to help manage finances, the press, family obligations, etc. to get them on the Eight Fold path. What in particular do they learn in college that is relevant? There are much better ways to deal with the alleged issues than forcing someone to go to college.

The obvious answer as to why the NBA does not consider this is that it would directly take out of Massa Stern's pockets, something which he and the owners he represents are unwilling to do.

In Support of Stern

My colleague Earl da Goat, in his post immediately below, wants to know why the NBA is happy to re-distribute the rents from young players to the NCAA.

As Bissinger notes in the article, the NBA benefits from drafting proven talent with an existing popular following, rather than nobodies from rusty gyms in the Mississippi Delta. Of course, without the age rule in place, no GM wants to be the guy who misses out on the next Garnett, so he feels compelled to take the risk. The age rule in the collective bargaining agreement solves the coordination problem and achieves an outcome that is better for all teams. (It seems to me that a similar problem bedeviled Wall Street in recent years; traders, fund managers, etc. felt compelled to take on more risk to keep up with the Joneses [or the Goldmans] even as the collective volatility of portfolios became untenable.)

Additionally, it is not even clear that the NBA loses anything economically from forcing Derrick Rose, Kevin Love, etc. to delay their entry into the league by one year. Despite the extra mileage on their wheels from the college games, the players will likely play the same number of pro seasons as they counterfactually would have without college; everyone feels he is entitled to "get paid" a certain amount. Jersey sales and other merch will likely be the same over time, even discounting the cash flows.

As for "Why do the players agree to this nonsense?" have you ever heard of negotiation, Earl? You give some, you get some. In the last round of bargaining in 2005, players received a bigger cut of revenues and the NBA won shorter contracts (as well as the age limit and dress code).

I support the age limit, and furthermore, I hope the limit is raised to age 20, so that players are forced to spend at least two years in college. Or perhaps the NBA could adopt Major League Baseball's model, where high school players must choose to either enter the draft at age 18, or commit to three years of college. "One and done" players who show up on a university campus for eight months and don't even bother attending class during their second semester make a mockery of the whole exercise. I do believe that college is a useful transition period for young people to test their independence in a controlled environment and learn the folkways of adulthood. What's more, a variety of prep-to-pros such as LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Monta Ellis, and so on have become illegitimate fathers since entering the league. (To be fair, James reportedly spends time with his children.) Surely a bit of campus time with peer counselors waving around condoms could have helped them. Additionally, a little time with some college hotties would have relieved Young Mr. Bynum's hot desire to make a spectacle of himself at the Playboy Mansion.

Paternalism and "Massa" Stern

Today's New York Times has a piece by LBJ biographer Harry Gerard Bissinger III (also known as Buzz and author of Friday Night Lights) describing how we "got punked" by Massa Stern that is well worth reading.

Bissinger's piece displays a shrewdness which affirms his status to be the Kissinger of sport journalists. (I'll understand if you can't get past the paragraph that starts... "If David Stern truly cared about his players’ well-being...")

As BB argues, the age limit on players entering the NBA is obviously a bad policy: it simply takes the rents the players could have earned on their exceptional talents and distributes it to the NCAA. The puzzle for me is, why is the the NBA interested in subsidizing the NCAA?

There was one other place we got punked by Massa Stern and his paternalistic attitude to the NBA players: The NBA dress code.

Why do the players agree to this nonsense?