Re: Good morning, WayRay

[Douglas342@xxxxxxx]

     Simple - the players announcing for the draft are high schoolers and 
first and second year college players.  They simply don't stay in college long 
enough to gain the polish you'd like.  That was why the collective bargaining 
agreement now includes a 4/5 year rookie deal, so you can hope to have your 
kidlet develop and resign him. Absent an occasional gem like Kobe, you HAVE to 
gamble on the kids.
     Personally, I still like the idea someone proposed here years ago:  a 
player gets seven "developmental years," starting after his HS class graduates.  
Sign him out of high school?  Seven year rookie contract.  After sophomore 
year?  5 year rookie deal.  After college graduation (well, after his class 
graduates)?  Three year deal.  It sort of guaratees that you have a mature player 
at the end of the rookie contract, and maybe acts as a slight disincentive for 
high schoolers to opt for the draft, knowing that if they are a late 
first-round pick, they'll get a decent contract, but if they stay in school, they'll 
go higher in the draft and get more money.

In a message dated 5/31/2003 6:06:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
Eggcentric@AOL.com writes:

> I do not understand drafting 3-4 year projects. Perhaps I have just not 
> adjusted to the present, but If a player is that raw, that far away, 
> why should he even be considered in a draft, especially in the lottery?  
> Why should any team be expected to tie up several salary years on a 
> first-round project who will either eventually fade away or maybe 
> worse yet -  finally begin to fulfill his potential just in time to force 
> his team to re-up his contract at or near the max or lose him to free 
> agency?  How many successful young/raw draftees like my beloved 
> McGrady are still with their original team?