Commissioner Adam Silver Thinks Two Year College Minimum Best for NBA



So it seems that the NBA really will be trying to move forward with the two-year college minimum before allowing players to enter the NBA draft. Reports have been out there that Silver would like to increase the age minimum to 20 years old and Silver has not shied away from letting it be known he believes that to be best for the league.

Silver spoke to media before the Rockets-Bobcats game in Charlotte and very simply let it be known where he stood on the issue.

“I think two years is the right balance.” Silver said, “I’ve had players say that a young man should have the right to earn a living at 18 and I’ve had others say we’d be a better league with more experienced players. I’m sensitive to both sides of the issue and it’s not something that I could unilaterally change even if we wanted to. It’s an issue that would have to be collectively bargained with our union.”

That last bit is important to pay attention to. Silver notes that he would need the player’s union to also agree to the rule, but also doesn’t mention how much of a mess the NBAPA is right now. Or the fact that a union made up of mostly guys who are role players would love it if college players had to wait an extra year before taking their roster spots.

This is something that could very realistically happen. And for those of us who like to see young, exciting players in the NBA (ie. everyone) waiting an extra year for a player like Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker to get to the NBA could be frustrating.

I understand the argument that it allows players to develop an extra year and be more prepared for the league, but let’s be real here; this is meant to protect teams from themselves more than anything else. And if you need the NBA to protect you from making a terrible decision, maybe you shouldn’t be making said decision to begin with.

The players who will be facing this rule change have very little to gain from another year in college. If we are totally honest, most college coaches (minus John Calipari) believe that players need them to succeed and will impose their systems on a guy rather than letting their game grow. Just look at what happened with Parker and Wiggins in their tournament losses.

Or if you need another example of why two years in college could hurt a potential lottery pick, look no further than Marcus Smart. Smart decided to forego being a guaranteed top pick in the draft for a year so he could go back and develop a bit more, and he was universally praised for it. Then in a few months all that was gone and he was shoving a fan known for overdoing it with players, becoming public enemy number 1 in college hoops. What exactly did Smart gain from this?

The bottom line is that if a guy is ready for the league, he should be allowed to play and make money. Taking a year of his youth and potentially his prime away just to protect some GM’s from making bad draft decisions is ridiculous.

What do you guys think? Should there be a two-year college minimum? Sound off in the comments or hit me up on Twitter and let me know!




  1. Imposing a two year minimum before college athletes can turn pro? My response to that is to play overseas after one year! Don’t let the NCAA exploit you for millions of dollars for an additional year!

  2. Have you NOT seen the quality of BBAll being played out there? Let me remind you, for every Kevin Durant or Carmelo Anthony to come after one year, there’s everybody else lacking the most basic and fundamentals of the game. As a fan of the game, I’d rather see a more polished product.

Comments are closed.