Bleacher Report - Articles by Joe Kessenich

As the 2009 NBA Draft Approaches, A New Twist on the One-and-Done Rule

Joe Kessenich — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:28:54 -0400

I hate to be the one to break this, but the recent questions surrounding Derrick Rose and the Memphis basketball program, as well as O.J. Mayo and the USC program, are not an NBA problem. They are an NCAA problem.

Corruption in signing top college basketball prospects was around long before David Stern implemented an age minimum for the NBA, and if the Association were to reverse this rule, rest assured, corruption in college basketball would not come to an end.

So it's important we come from a realistic place when engaging in the debate over the so-called "One and Done" rule.

I have a theory on how to retool the NBA age regulation, put into place before the 2006 Draft. But first, I want to address how we got here in the first place. Here we go, the top four reasons why the NBA does not want players jumping straight into the draft from high school:

1. It Hurts the Product on the Floor

For a two-year period after Michael Jordan officially retired in 2003, David Stern watched the NBA product get uglier. A contributing factor to this ugliness was a surplus of inexperienced, unpolished players, who lacked seasoning under the tutelage of the premier college coaches in America. Prospects skipping college and going to the pros were stocking the league with raw talent, with an emphasis on on the raw.

Stern and other league officials saw the quality of basketball suffering under this system, and they sought to curb it as much as possible.

2. It Handcuffs NBA General Managers

It is extremely difficult for NBA scouts to determine the All-Star potential of a top high school prospect, based on what he does against other high school players or in a draft workout. NBA-game speed is a whole different animal from prep school.

At the same time, the sports-hype machine is always churning. As a result, the top prospects are plastered all over the media, and even our beloved Bleacher Report. The fans are clamoring for their savior draft pick, and no GM wants to be tagged as "the guy who passed on the next Kobe Bryant."

So the high school kid is taken, and he may spend a couple years on the bench getting ready for prime time, all the while eating up cap space that could be used for key acquisitions (see Kwame Brown).

3. Kobe and LeBron Are the Exceptions, Not the Rule

For every one Kobe Bryant or LeBron James, there are four Sebastian Telfairs or Eddy Currys or Leon Smiths. Before the minimum was established, too many high schoolers were jumping into the pro ranks because they could, not because they should.

4. Maturity Level

Commisioner Stern and the rest of the NBA wanted to slow an influx of immaturity into their league. We have entered an era in sports where a premium is placed on good public relations; maturity in players is valued almost as much as talent. With the age minimum rule, the NBA took a stance that makes sense in the age of the Internet and 24-hour news cycle.

If you're a great high school player and you have the grades to go to college, good, then go. Who knows? You might learn something, and you might even enjoy it.

On the other hand, if you're 18 and you can't get it together enough to make it to fourth-period Spanish, then, I'm sorry my friend, you're not ready to handle a $20 million contract, and the expectations of a franchise.

These four reasons convinced the NBA to implement the current system, and the League has no plans to reverse it. In fact, Stern wants the age raised to 20, instead of 19, during the next collective bargaining negotiation.

Meanwhile, college basketball purists claim the "One and Done" rule is killing the spirit of scholastic athletics. I contend that the spirit died long ago, and that it is not the NBA's responsibility to revive it; that challenge rests squarely on the shoulders of the NCAA.

The Theory

While I don't believe the rule will be reversed, I do believe it can be adjusted, and adjusted in a way that may lead to the satisfaction of college basketball purists and the NBA alike. And my proposition is this:

Academic standards for the NBA.

Wait, hear me out on this one.

First off, we hang on to the 19-year-old rule, but with an "escape clause" built in based on academic achievement in high school.

We hold the same academic standards for early admittance to the NBA as we would for any major university. If you have the grades, then you have earned yourself a choice: Enter the NBA draft, or hone your game at a top college program that would love to have you.

This would have a multi-prong effect of satisfying the academic purists, motivating the top prospects to get the job done in high school, and instilling the discipline and maturity that the NBA is attempting to achieve.

If you can't meet the standards with your high school grades, that's OK. You can still make it to the show. But you are going to have to ride it out in Europe, junior college, or the D-League until you turn 19.

Think about it. This can work.

We all use our academic accomplishments in resumes or interviews in our attempts to land a job. The NFL uses the Wonderlic Test to evaluate potential draft picks. The same standards can work for the NBA, and it is an option that should be considered.

King for a Day: For LeBron's Shot To Be Legendary, Cavs Must Win Series

Joe Kessenich — Sat, 23 May 2009 11:14:48 -0400

Magic's baby hook in the Garden, Robert Horry's miracle three to push the Lakers over the Kings, Jordan over Russell in Utah. All these shots have one thing in common: They lifted their teams, not just to victory in a game, not just in a series, but to an eventual World Championship.

These are the moments that morph great NBA players into legends, and burn into ours minds, as fans, where we were to witness it.

LeBron James is at the brink of becoming a legend before our eyes, and in only his sixth season no less. We haven't had to wait very long for LeBron to make a play for the throne.

But for all this to come to full fruition, the Cleveland Cavaliers must become the Eastern Conference Champions, and make a serious run at the title.

We have a tendency to forget the heroics of the vanquished.

Anyone remember where they were when the Sixers' Andre Iguodala hit his shot to beat the Magic in these 2009 playoffs? Anyone remember the Sixers were in the 2009 playoffs?

YouTube is packed with last-second shots that fall by the wayside, when compared to the seminal moments that make up the timeline of NBA history.

I give credit to Cleveland fans. They seem to have a full appreciation for their front row seats to greatness. It continues to be a compelling story, to see Cleveland finally get its moment in the sun, after decades of heartbreak in every sport possible.

NBA fans are enjoying the ride--inside of Cleveland and out. But with LeBron's future in Ohio uncertain, time may be running out for the ultimate payoff.

Dwight Howard said watching LeBron's shot on Friday night, "...was like watching a movie."

This story can go down in NBA lore, but it needs the right ending.

Orlando Magic Head Coach Stan Van Gundy Shocked By Game One Victory

Joe Kessenich — Thu, 21 May 2009 15:35:37 -0400

When asked to comment Wednesday night during his post-game press conference on how his team managed pulled off a surprising Game One victory, despite a stellar outing by LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers, Orlando Magic Head Coach Stan Van Gundy hazily responded, "I have no idea. I mean I'm at a complete loss right now."

Van Gundy, at the podium, appeared to be despondent and confused, and, as so often is the case, looked to be sweating.

When prodded further, Van Gundy continued:

"I don't know what you want me to say, guys. I mean I'm looking at the stat sheet, and I can't believe my eyes. Dwight [Howard] had 30 points and 13 boards, Rashard [Lewis] was 9-for-13 from the field. That just wasn't the team I've seen since we've been in the playoffs. We've watched no film. None! I've been in a complete panic for two days. I told everyone I'd be in my office, ordering new workout T-shirts to wear with my suit, and to just go play 'knock-out' or something. I did everything in my power to make sure we were completely unprepared coming out of the locker room, and yet somehow we end up looking like this."

Van Gundy's disappointment seemed a bit displaced, given that his team won the game.

But, you have to understand something about "Stan Van". He is very particular that his teams play a certain way—erratic, unintelligent, and soft. If he feels like he can't get that from the players he has, he doesn't tend to handle it very well.

"Somehow between now and Game Two, we have to get back to working horrible shots, and leaving Dwight with his hands waving in the air," Van Gundy continued, "like we did against Boston."

In response to what adjustments he planned on making for Game Two, Van Gundy opined:

"I guess we have to look at running zero guys at LeBron, or starting Adonal Foyle. I don't know, but something's gotta change, or we're gonna find ourselves in the Finals before we know it.

"Nothing else? OK. Thanks guys."

Almighty Goodell: NFL Commissioner Weighs In On Michael Vick

Joe Kessenich — Wed, 20 May 2009 23:45:08 -0400

“Let he who is without sin cast the first blindside hit.”

I don't know about you, but I'm beginning to tire of the sanctimony of one Roger Goodell.

I've come to notice that when NFL players unfortunately crossover from the sports page to the police blotter, be it Pacman...excuse me...Adam Jones, or Plaxico Burress, or now Michael Vick, our NFL Commissioner seems to enjoy positioning himself as nothing short of infallible.

Each time one of his players is alleged, or proved, to have performed an unsavory action, Goodell sees it as high time to climb up on his pedestal...literally.

The Commish has no patience for formal investigations, or due process, or a jury of your peers. In fact, if he doesn't like what's scrolling across the bottom-line of his TV, and your name is next to it, you should probably expect a phone call.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am in no way implying that I condone any of these players' actions, proved or pending. What's more is I agree with Goodell's philosophy of aggressively taking on characters who would bring embarrassment, and in turn lost revenues, to the NFL.

What I do fail to see is the necessity to conduct each press conference or interview on these incidents, with the aire of a man who has made zero mistakes in his life.

I've heard this tone often from Goodell when past incidents have come across the wire. But it particularly hit home for me in a recent quote regarding the upcoming release of Michael Vick from federal custody following his conviction in connection with dog-fighting. The quote reads as follows:

"I will want to meet with Michael", [and ask him], "does he understand the mistakes he made and is he genuine and have remorse for those actions...That's something he has to prove to myself and the general public."

I disagree with Goodell's view. Vick is about to be released, after spending the better part of two years in Leavenworth Federal Penitentiary. Most of us know the name Leavenworth, and it's not because they have the best Salisbury steak.

There is now a swirling debate on whether or not Vick should be punished further by the NFL, and Goodell feels like Vick has something left to prove.

Michael Vick's crime was ugly and reprehensible. As a result, he was tried, convicted, and sentenced in a court of law. He is now coming out on the other side of that sentence, hopefully with remorse in his heart. A federal parole board has deemed that he has adequately paid his debt to society.

Society includes both the NFL, and Commissioner Goodell.