Blogger Roundtable: NBA Draft Prospects

There is always hype going into a draft concerning a special few players who will go as lottery picks. Making the correct choice, or winning the lottery in a sense, requires an in-depth analysis of the top college prospects. The best player in the draft may not be the most pro-ready as of now, but that is the beauty of these athletes entering the league so young. They can be coached and molded into the ideal player.

We asked our bloggers which college prospect who has declared for the 2014 NBA Draft is going to have the best professional career. Here is what they had to say:

Stephen Dreznick, Featured Blogger- Andrew Wiggins

Andrew Wiggins will have the best professional career. He has the perfect build for a defender, since he is 6' 8" with an even bigger wingspan. There is minimal bust potential with Wiggins, because he will be able to shut down the opposing team's best player. Moreover, he has significantly developed his offensive game since arriving at Kansas, and the sky is the limit on this side of the ball. I could see Andrew Wiggins becoming a player of Kevin Durant's caliber, if not better.

Thomas Kroner, Featured Blogger- Aaron Gordon

This may be my Bay Area bias coming through, but I'd have to say Aaron Gordon. He's 6'8" with out of this world athleticism. He's also much more developed skill-wise, than his NBA comparison Blake Griffin was at the same point in their careers. If he gets drafted by a team that puts him in a good situation look for Gordon to blossom in the NBA.
 

Matthew Hakimian, Featured Blogger- Andrew Wiggins

This question is really contingent on whether or not Jabari Parker comes out or stays another year at Duke to play with Jahlil Okafor. The guy can score in any way he wants - he reminds me of a more physical Carmelo Anthony. If Parker doesn't come out though, Wiggins has the best chance to become a superstar from this year's class. Wiggins was the consensus top pick prior to this season, but he underperformed as a freshman at Kansas. He has a ton of potential, but he will definitely need to bulk up a bit if he wants to thrive in the NBA.

Max Fogle, Editor-in-Chief- Joel Embiid

It's really easy to dream on a guy like Embiid.  He's got the measurables (7'0'', 250 lbs.) and the production (11.2 points, 8.1 rebounds, and 2.6 blocks per game while averaging just 23.1 minutes). He's the best center prospect in a long time, and it's not hard to imagine him becoming a perennial All-Star.   The BIG thing working against the Cameroonian is his injury history, along with the recent track record of centers selected with top picks.  But if you are a team that is picking early, the best bet for an impact player is probably Embiid.

Be sure to comment below to let us know your opinion.

Turning the Big Dance into a National Holiday

Dear Mr. Obama,

I know you have a lot on your plate and all, but I have a modest proposal for you. After watching the amazing Kentucky-Michigan Elite Eight matchup, I was somewhat relieved, not because of the outcome of the game, but because I knew I could finally get back to my homework. There were only two games on this particular day of the tournament, I can't begin to describe how little I got done during the first round of the tournament.

So I must humbly suggest to you that you make the first Thursday and Friday of the NCAA March Madness Tournament national holidays. I'm aware there is currently a movement for similar action to be taken on baseball's opening day. I fully support this as well, but regard this as a completely separate request.

I'll admit that I haven't made it to all of my classes during the first two days of the tournament since I was 14. I, however, know i'm not the only one whose lost productivity during March Madness. According to Sebastian Posey of CBS, over 8 million hours are spent watching the tournament by people at their places of work. This equates to roughly $175 million lost during the tournament each year.

Not only do basketball enthusiasts and gambling addicts cost their companies money by watching March Madness at their offices, they also hurt their coworkers who actually strive to get work done. According to Posey, over one in three office computer systems completely shut down at some point during the first two days of the tournament, due to the strain places on them by the amount of streaming done for the games.

So I ask, does anyone get work done during the tournament? It appears that the answer is no. So what would two days off do except allow people to watch the games from their homes instead of their place of work. Plus, think of all the money the national and state governments could save by not having to pay the salaries of their employees for these two days.

People living in the eastern time-zone may not understand this work-basketball predicament, but put yourself in the shoes of someone on the west coast. Games out there start at 9am. About 2/3 games start before the average west coast 9-5er leaves the office, this doesn't account for any commute they may have. So of this year's games left coasters would have had to miss our include: OSU vs. Dayton, NC State vs. St. Louis, NDSU vs. Oklahoma, Mercer vs. Duke, SFA vs. VCU, and UNC vs. Providence.

At the end of the day, I really don't see a scenario in which my passion for basketball ever subsides enough for me to do anything productive during March Madness. Declaring the first Thursday and Friday national holidays would allow me and the millions of similarly unproductive people to better justify our viewing habits. I hope you consider my proposal.

'One and Done' College Basketball Players

In the past few years, the concept of 'one and done' college basketball players - freshmen who enter the NBA Draft after just one season of college ball - has become increasingly prevalent.  There is much debate over this issue, and three common opinions prevail:
         
            1. 'One and done' is okay
            2. These players should be forced to play two years (or be two years removed from high school)
            3. They should be able to go pro directly out of high school. Something high profile players such as Lebron James and Kobe Bryant have successfully done.

While it is understood that star point guards such as Kyrie Irving and Derrick Rose missed out on their college experience by declaring for the NBA Draft after just one year in college, let's take a look at the impact eliminating the concept of 'one and done' would potentially have on the 2014 NBA Draft, which is being hyped as possibly one of the best of drafts of all time.

According to a recent mock draft, done by www.draftnet.com, 5 of the top 7 projected picks are college freshman, and another is an international player from Australia who is the same age.  So, changing the 'one and done' rule would eliminate the eligibility of all of the projected top 7 picks except for one: Marcus Smart, a sophomore from Oklahoma State.

This is a huge difference. Prospects like Andrew Wiggins, pictured above, are being considered the best players to come out of high school since LeBron James back in 2003.  His teammate at Kansas, center Joel Embiid, has only been playing basketball for a few years since moving to the United States from Cameroon and was named the Big 12 Defensive Player of the Year.

Jabari Parker, another freshman phenom being coached by Mike Krzyzewski at Duke University, is potentially the #1 pick in this year's draft.  He, like Derrick Rose, an MVP back in 2010-11, is from Chicago and went to Simeon High School - most people believe that Parker was a better talent than Rose was coming out of high school.

The bottom line is that recent drafts have been dominated by players leaving after their freshman year of college.  The entire landscape of the NBA Draft will be different if this rule is eliminated.  If a rule change occurs, due to the belief that these players are either not mature enough or need to get a better college education, then the way we look at the breakdown of both college basketball and the NBA will change completely.

Mid-Major Conference Tournaments: The Solution

This is Part II of a two-part post on mid-major college basketball tournament reform.  To read Part I, click here.  
The all-important question then becomes what can a mid-major conference do to ensure that their distinguished team has the best chance of making it through the conference tournament? I would argue that one of the most significant ways that a conference can do this is through implementing a tournament format that rewards the most successful teams.

The format used in the America East during the 2012-2013 season is a perfect illustration of a conference doing the complete opposite.By allowing the highest bidding school to host the tournament and play all of the games up until the final (which is then played at the highest remaining seed) on their home floor, the conference was allowing teams to buy arguably the most influential advantage in all of college hoops that doesn’t concern talent of players and coaches- a raucous home crowd. In my opinion, this runs contrary to the spirit of college athletics, and to the credit of the America East leadership, the format has been changed to a campus sites model for the 2014-2015 season.

 It is my contention that all traditional mid-major conferences that generally do not have access to at-large bids should adopt this campus sites model that has already been put in place by the likes of the Northeast Conference and the Patriot League. One of the most basic principles in Division 1 college basketball is that teams win more often at home than on the road. Looking at the Summit League for example, in an analysis of 388 conference games, the home team won 61.60% of the time. In the Sun Belt, an analysis of 594 conference games concluded that the home team won 63.30% of the time.

This data provides backing for the assertion that home teams win mid-major college basketball games, and by implementing a campus sites format (in which the team with the higher seed as determined by season performance plays before their home crowd), conferences are doing their part to provide a safety net to teams who have demonstrated their ability to represent their conferences successfully all year long.

Neutral site models and formats similar to the one used by the America East in the 2012-2013 season, simply do not do this. The question then becomes why should mid-major conferences want their best team to represent them in the NCAA Tournament? The truth is that conferences have every incentive to get their best representative to the massive audience of the NCAA Tournament.

Economically, it pays for conferences to send teams that have a chance to sneak a win or make a Cinderella run. While first round and play-in game losers bring conferences $1.9 million under the NCAA’s Revenue Distribution Plan (teams get compensated for every game they compete in), teams that make a run in the tournament can earn up to $9.5 million for their conference if they make the Final Four (and if a team loses after the first round but before the Final Four, it can be anywhere in-between $1.9 and $9.5 million).  This revenue can and does go a long way for mid-major conferences.

Using the America East as a representative example, there are 19 other sports that the conference and member schools must find a way to fund (because nearly all of the other sports are either revenue neutral or lose money). When it comes down to it, if a conference can find ways to get their best team into the NCAA Tournament, it can make operating the rest of the conference that much easier. Additionally, in order to capitalize on the potential for licensing deals in merchandizing and TV, mid-major conferences need to build a brand.

With that said, it’s impossible for a conference to build a brand that is recognizable to the casual college basketball fan if its one team is losing in the first round of the Tournament every year. Networks aren’t lining up to secure contracts with conferences like the America East, especially if the best teams aren't the ones representing the conference on a consistent basis.  

Let’s face it, brands are built in March. The Colonial Athletic Association and the Ivy League weren’t awarded national television contracts with NBC because they have a history of losing in the first round of the Tournament (granted the IVY League doesn’t have a conference tournament, but I believe that is taking things too far and is an issue for another article). On the contrary, it’s historic runs deep into March by the likes of VCU (in 2011) and Cornell (in 2010) that attracts networks to conferences, and it’s this kind of history that attracts the casual viewer and builds name recognition.

Only once a known brand is established can a mid-major conference like the America East ascend in the ranks of college basketball. While it can be argued that teams control their own destiny and as such the best teams will make it through these conference tournaments, sometimes things go awry. No team is perfect, and conferences need to do their part to reward the best teams for their demonstrated success.

At the end of the day, it is in the best interests of mid-major conferences to see their best team advance to the NCAA Tournament.  This means that it is critical that they set procedures for their conference tournament that promotes positive outcomes for the best team, and I am of the opinion that a campus sites model is one of the most effective ways to do so.

This is Part II of a two-part post on mid-major college basketball conference tournaments. Click here for Part I.

Mid-Major Conference Tournaments: The Problem

This is Part I of a two-part post on mid-major college basketball conference tournaments. Check back tomorrow for Part II.

As University of Albany standout Mike Black drove down the lane in a 59-59 game with under 5 seconds to play in the semi-finals of the America East Men’s Basketball Tournament, with a chance to play in the all hallowed NCAA Tournament on the line, I knew exactly what was about to happen. The #4 seeded Great Danes of Albany were about to upset my #1 seeded Stony Brook University Seawolves and move on to the conference finals for a shot at the bright lights of the big dance.

Black scored with 2.4 seconds to play to put the Danes up 61-59, which would end up being the final score.  I wondered how the conference leadership could possibility allow this to come to fruition; it seemed unreal to me that a team with a 9-7 conference record at the time (Albany, who held a 22-10 record overall) could possibly be in a position to host and beat a team that only lost 6 games the entire season (Stony Brook held a 14-2 conference record and a 24-6 record overall).

What good reason, I said to myself (and anyone that would listen to me for that matter), would the conference have to select a tournament format where one team, regardless of seed determined by season performance, gets to play in front of their home fans in every game up until the final? The answer I came up with?

There aren’t any.

The plight of the 2012-2013 Seawolves is a familiar one in the world mid-major college hoops. In any given year, there are two or three teams from lower ranked conferences (think the America East, the Summit League, or the Patriot League) who fall prey to a system that, simply put, does not reward excellence. The sad reality for teams in conferences sitting near the bottom of Division 1 college basketball is that regular season performance just does not matter. Save a near undefeated campaign or a top 50 RPI (which may or may not get you an at-large bid for teams at this level) the only way into the NCAA Tournament for teams in the bottom 10 or 15 conferences is through one’s conference tournament.

While clearly not the most “fair” system, it is the standard and it needs to be embraced (because it’s just not going away anytime soon). The truth of the matter is that 8 out of the 10 members of the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee are athletic directors or commissioners from high major conferences (perhaps one could make the argument that the West Coast Conference Commissioner should be considered a mid-major representative and that number is really 7, but I would argue that the perennial success of WCC teams like Gonzaga, BYU, and St.Mary’s in the sport of men’s basketball dictates otherwise).

Until the ratio of high-major to mid-major representatives on the committee draws closer to 1:1, there is going to be a natural tendency for these committee members representing conferences like the ACC, BIG TEN, and the PAC 12 to give at-large bids to mediocre, high major bubble teams (i.e. Minnesota in 2012-2013, with an 8-10 conference record) over successful mid-majors like Stony Brook.

I’m not saying that a team like Stony Brook would have necessarily performed equal to or better than Minnesota if given a shot in the NCAA Tournament (because Minnesota did end up beating a very good UCLA team in the 2013 tournament), I’m merely saying that it’s impossible to know how they would have performed because mid-major teams aren’t given proportional opportunity relative to high major teams.

This profound disparity of opportunity does not mean that mid-major conferences aren’t given a chance to shine under the bright lights of the big dance. This places a substantial burden on conferences to make absolutely certain that they are doing everything in their power to get their best team through their conference tournaments.

This is Part I of a two-part post on mid-major college basketball conference tournaments. Check back tomorrow for Part II.

Roundtable: March Madness Storylines

Florida Gulf Coast University became the first #15 seed to reach the Sweet 16 in the 2013 tournament

Roundtable compiles the views of various ILRSMC bloggers and e-board members. If you have a suggestion for a future roundtable topic, email Geoff at gjr52@cornell.edu.

As always, March Madness has given sports fans some of the craziest and most memorable moments of the year. From Florida Gulf Coast University's shocking run to the Sweet 16 to Kevin Ware's horrifying injury, the tournament has provided plenty of memories and images for CBS' "One Shining Moment.

Last week, we asked several ILRSBS club members what they felt was the biggest March Madness storyline so far. Check out their answers after the jump.


Gabe Cassillo: The reemergence of Syracuse's vaunted 2-3 zone. The way the Orange are playing, could this be Jim Boehiem's last dance? [Editor's Note: Question asked BEFORE Syracuse's loss]

Robbie Cohen: I think the biggest storyline is the success of the Big East in its final season as we know it. Two of the Final Four teams are currently playing their final seasons in the Big East - Louisville and Syracuse. The Big East also featured Marquette, who will join the new Big East after the season, in the Elite 8, giving it more teams than any other conference. Great way to send out a great conference, and we can only hope that it stays strong as a basketball-centric conference.

Chizoba Ibeanusi: The BIGGEST storyline of March Madness so far was definitely when Florida Gulf Coast #15 beat Georgetown #2. Practically everyone I knew thought Georgetown would win and no one even knew who Florida Gulf Coast was. It's crazy that a new school could beat out a known winner such as Georgetown. I definitely think that was the first major bracket upset.

Adam Kirsch: You can't talk about March Madness without discussing Wichita State. While the national media was obsessed with Florida Gulf Coast, the #9 Shockers dispatched #1 seed Gonzaga, fresh off a 32-3 season, and easily beat La Salle. With the Cinderella spotlight all their own, they took down a dangerous Ohio State team and punched their ticket to the Final Four.

 John Rodriguez: I think the storyline for the March Madness so far has been: Cinderella Story Florida Gulf Coast and the rise of mid major schools busting everyone's bracket this year. The balance of power in college basketball seems to be evening out.

Zach Schelberg: Up until Sunday night [3/31], I would have had to highlight The University of Michigan's historic second-half comeback against the top-seeded Kansas Jayhawks as one of the most memorable moments of the tournament. Trey Burke's ability to take over the game and hit clutch shot after shot to come away with a victory, will truly be something to remember. However, after witnessing Kevin Ware's gruesome injury against Duke, it is one moment that I unfortunately will not be able to get off my mind.