One and done refers to the popular notion of only spending one year playing college basketball before entering the NBA. The rule was implemented in 2005, before which players were allowed to enter the NBA right out of high school. Several notable players, including Lebron James, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, and Dwight Howard came right out of high school and will all be future Hall of Famers. However, the argument for the rule, which states that a player must be at least 19 years old or one year removed from high school, is that 17 and 18-year-old kids are not mature enough and fully developed to be able to handle the fame, media, or rigor of playing professional basketball. The question is: Has this rule been effective or should it change one way or another? On one hand, the kid can make a smoother transition to the NBA and improve his talent level by going to college, but on the other hand it is obvious that some kids could go straight to the NBA so it doesn’t make sense to hold them back when they can’t earn any money and only run the risk of getting injured.
This issue has risen in recent years to the increasing number of basketball players that are clearly only going to college to play basketball for one year and have no intention on getting a degree in college. Many have suggested implementing a two-year minimum at college before going to the NBA, claiming that 19 years old is still too young to handle professional basketball. This would put more of an emphasis on academics, since the player would have to keep his grades up for at least three semesters rather than only one. However, I’m not so sure I wouldn’t go the other direction on this one. Why not eliminate the rule and allow players to go to the NBA out of high school again? One year really doesn’t make that much of a difference mentally or physically, and it is a waste of time for these kids to just barely get by with their academics that they have no intention of finishing when they could be earning millions in the NBA. Obviously, this would only apply to the elite players in the game. One example is Andrew Wiggins. It is unanimously agreed upon that he would be the #1 pick in the NBA draft next month if he wasn’t required to go to college for a year. Instead, he will have to spend next season at Kansas to be eligible, where his draft stock can only go down with the risk of injury or an off season.
In the end, I think there are pros and cons to zero, one, or two years in college before the NBA. I am not passionate toward any one way, but I do think there should be some more flexibility for the players to decide what to do with their careers. What do you guys think the rule should be? Let me know in the poll down below.
Please like the post, comment if you have feedback, and share with others.