A 60% success rate is stellar? So if your favorite NBA team only gets a good player with 3 of every 5 first round picks you're happy? I don't agree that's reasonable ROI or risk/reward for a teams valuable draft picks. On a separate note David Stern was quoted today as saying if he could he'd add another year to make it 20 or 2 years removed. Here's a quote: "It's not that we say you have to go to college, it's that we say we would like a year to look at them and I think it's been interesting to see how the players do against first-class competition in the NCAAs and then teams have the ability to judge and make judgments, because high-ranking draft picks are very, very valuable."
Perhaps you could strengthen your arguement with a little research - what are the percentages for success in the pros for those that DO go to college first? Looking back at the Knicks first rounder the last 15 years, thats Walter McCarty, John Wallace, Dontae Jones, John Thomas, Fredrick Weis, Donnel Harvey, Michael Sweetney, Channing Frye, David Lee, Renaldo Balkman, Mardy Collins, Wilson Chandler, Danillo Gallinari, and Jordan Hill.
A 60% shot looks pretty good....I'm actually afraid to do the Nets - '95 would start with my own Bruins Ed O'Bannon - the likely #1 overall pick had he come straight out of high school. Got the fullest college experience - College Player of the Year, NCAA champion, but it cost him his pro career, as he destroyed his leg as a freshman (they had to replace the ligaments in his leg with tendons from a freaking cadaver). He could star at 2 games per week and a couple practice hours a day in college, but couldn't play back to back games, or 6 day a week practices in the pros.
You can't use the Knicks as an example (though I knew someone would). But seriously, I would trust lots of guys on this board over 50% of the NBA GM's so you're right, but it doesn't mean any fan should be happy about it. That said, I could do an analysis of first round picks when I can find some time and let you khow how it comes out but I'm not enough of an NBA fan to decide who would be considered a success or not.
Well, how 'bout the Celts then? Starting with UCLA flop Jerome Moiso, Joe Johnson, Kendrick Brown (never played in the league) , Joe Forte (career was 25 games over 2 yrs), Troy Bell, Dahntay Jones, Al Jefferson, Delonte West, Tony Allen, Gerald Green, Randy Foye, Jeff Green (traded away draft night), JR Giddings, Avery Bradley, Marshon Brooks (immediately traded for Jajaun Johnson!)....
I think the numbers pretty much speak for themselves; High School draft picks worked out at a better rate. Probably because only the very best are even considered. But think about that; from '95 to 2005 %40 of the hs picks ended up being All Star level players. I threw the other bunch in off the top of my head to say that at leas 60% but probably more end up being role players at worst.
There are always counter-examples, like the Jonathan Benders and Kwame Browns of the world. But I still stick to my original point: people have overestimated how "bad" the NBA is at selecting HS players, and how much of a risk it is for HS kids that enter the draft.
The truth is, when the NBA scouts think you're good enough to take out of HS... you have very high chances of being a successful pro.
I don't know if the same correlation is true for one-and-done players. Off the top of my head I think it's probably much worse actually.
Bottom line, it would make a ton of sense for the NBA to adopt the rule college baseball uses: If the pros want to draft you right out HS, you can. But if you choose to go to college you aren't eligible again until after your Jr year.
Then all the legitimate pros, the Anthony Davises, John Walls, etc.. who any GM in the world would have drafted out of HS, can go do their thing right away. These kids are widely recognized as pros, and are ready to begin their careers, just like Arod and Straw were coming out HS. Let them earn a living they've earned.
And then it keeps college programs in tack for a year or two longer, so you can actually build a team. And guys who aren't "can't miss" pros, get a little more seasoning. And you don't have the constant questions, does he go pro after his frosh season? if he stays, will he go pro after soph year?
It gives college basketball more continuity and predictability. While also letting the truly elite pursue their dreams.