By: Eric T
Sportparody Columnist
The NBA’s new collective bargaining agreement inked out over a week ago is a matter of business. Business, which is good for everyone. Good news for the owners, who will enjoy relaxed trading rules and larger salary caps. Good news for the veterans, who will receive increased pensions after retirement. Good news for the league, which will conduct four random drug tests per year on players for performance enhancing and recreational drugs. Not to mention harsher penalties for violations, more jobs for the average basketball player (roster increases from 12 to 14 players a team), and less debilitating max contracts. The new agreement seems to benefit everyone in the league, everyone, it seems, but for a new little rule that requires a player to be over the age of 19 to declare for the NBA draft. Not so good news for the aspiring high-school prep.
It can be argued that David Stern’s tremendous push for an age limit for the NBA draft is the consummate business decision. Amid the lagging attendance, the shrinking ratings, Stern had to do something to counteract the public perception that the game has been increasingly dominated by a youth movement, a movement that features raw athleticism, outrageous dunks, and sloppy turnovers instead of good old passing, dribbling, and defense. He had to remind them of the happy days, when Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, and Michael Jordan stayed in school for at least a couple years, when they came into the league ready and polished. The age limit will also do wonders for both the NCAA Basketball college game. It will enjoy a tremendous influx of talent for the first time in probably ten years, serving as a sort of minor league, much like the NFL and its college counterpart, preparing young athletes in the fundamentals of the game: the lost art of the mid-range jumper and lay-up. On paper, this is an outstanding business decision. Improve public perception of the game and the product on the court while providing a boon to your college “minor league” system. Give your future pros relevant basketball training and competition, and while they’re at it, some kind of college education, instead of a seat on the end of a bench, eating precious salary cap space, learning nothing and doing nothing. It makes sense, it makes perfect sense, and as a matter of business, it makes the most sense.
It's a matter of business. But it's also a matter of race, and no matter how hard one analyzes, prods, and pokes, one can’t escape the unfortunate fact that the rule will selectively exclude a certain group. It's a little unfair, to make this claim - after all, this draft limit will only affect kids under 19: where's the race issue? The problem is that one can’t examine and consider this stipulation in vacuum; one can’t simply assume that it has the same impact on everyone, every group. There’s social context, there’s financial context, there’s an individual context. And unfortunately, under this rule one and only one minority group will be barred from declaring for the NBA draft after high school. Under this rule only one minority group will be unable to make millions of dollars from teams gladly willing to pay it. Is this fair? Is this discrimination? Is this racism?
Other sports don’t have it so hard. In tennis you can declare yourself a pro at anytime, provided you can back it up and make the cut. Same with golf. Baseball allows teams to draft players right out of high school, pay millions and then shove them into a minor league system where they can forget about them. Hockey was the same as basketball before it went out of business. Track and field, skating, wrestling - all the “amateur” sports of the Olympics utilize athletes at any age, provided they can perform. Of all the major sports (and many of the minor ones) only basketball and football, will now have an age limit. Unlike basketball, however, football enjoys a (more) diverse body of athletes. NFL’s rule, though questionable enough to be challenged by one Maurice Clarett, is much less discriminatory than the NBA’s.
But I won’t hyperbolize. The NBA isn’t racist. David Stern is certainly not racist The forces at work here are not agreeing to this rule under the precepts of hate or bigotry – they are agreeing to it as the best form of business, and nothing else. The intent, above all else, is purely for the good of the game, for the good of business, and for the fans. These are reasonable expectations and standards to have. But is this fair, is this discrimination? Yes and no. While the intent of David Stern, the owners and union, is essentially innocent, the use of an age limit is discriminatory. They certainly don’t mean for it to be discriminatory, but you’d be ignorant about the state of the game of basketball not to know exactly who is affected by this rule. It’s a sort of blind eye discrimination. A subtle discernment, a turning of the shoulder, a look-the-other-way type of ignorance. It’s something that when placed on paper and ink, put behind a glass case, called something else entirely, can seem harmless – even beneficial. It’s also something that excludes and separates, something that discerns and singles out. It’s not racism. And it's not quite discrimination. But it's something close.