When Brandon Jennings opted to play in Europe last summer, many wondered if it would be the start of a trend. Would the best American players opt to follow his lead and play in Europe for a year instead of college, then go for the NBA Draft? How much would Jennings’ success, or lack thereof, influence this? Well, I think we got an answer on Wednesday.
The New York Times broke the news that Jeremy Tyler, a 6’10” junior power forward from San Diego, has dropped out of high school to play in Europe next season. That’s right: he’s not going to do a senior year of high school, at least not now. That’s a little different than the path Jennings took and players like Lance Stephenson have been speculated to be considering. It’s a move that already has many people buzzing, and it’s one that doesn’t look good.
Before anyone tries to come up with their own ideas, the problem with this isn’t the mere fact that he’s doing it. It’s not that he’s putting off education for what he wants to do. It’s not that it’s basketball instead of a lower-profile sport, or indeed that he’s an athlete doing it instead of, say, an engineer. It’s not that he’s an American doing it but it’s okay for Europeans to play professionally in Europe at such ages. It’s not, as Sonny Vaccaro hinted in comments to the New York Times, that he’s basically being a rebel.
The problem is that every indication is that Tyler is doing this for all the wrong reasons, and not only for a fast buck. It’s not a natural step in his development, it’s not a good situation for a teenage kid to move half a world away, and he’s simply not good enough right now.
Tyler is certainly a prospect. He has a good body and some skills inside, and at times can be a good shot-blocker. But he also doesn’t have much of a motor, so he doesn’t dominate like he should given his physical gifts. He’s nowhere near ready to be a pro right now. He’s not the prospect Brandon Jennings is, and let the record show that Jennings isn’t exactly setting Europe on fire. In fact, I’d venture to say that Tyler isn’t even a quarter of what Amare Stoudemire was when he was a rising senior in high school. Stoudemire dominated games; Tyler doesn’t.
The more troubling thing is a non-basketball item, and it’s not the mere fact that he’s dropping out of high school just to make a fast buck – we’ll come back to that. The story said that according to Tyler, his game stagnated by playing high school ball in the U.S., especially with the season his team just had. They went 15-11, had three transfers ruled ineligible and two coaches fired. For the real troubling part, though, just listen to his own words.
“It was boring and I wasn’t getting better,” Tyler told the New York Times. “Each game was the same thing. I was getting triple-teamed and getting hacked. After each game I’d have scratches and bruises up and down my arms from getting triple-teamed. It just wasn’t for me.”
The poor thing. If he can’t tolerate that, or the adversity of his team having a 15-11 season while he was the team’s main option and scored nearly 29 points per game, how in the world is he ever going to manage as a professional in a country he doesn’t even know? That kind of adversity is small peanuts compared to what he’s likely about to face, and that’s before we get to the fact that he’ll be a 17-year-old kid in this setting. Life hits the immature a lot harder than double and triple teams that might leave him with a few scratches or bruises.
In fact, at almost every turn, we’re reminded that he’s a kid about to do something a grownup does, and it’s not just the job. He’s going to move to a country he doesn’t know, and having his older brother there will only help so much. He’ll still be a kid in that setting.
You want more proof? Just look at more of his own words.
“Nowadays people look to college for more off-the-court stuff versus being in the gym and getting better,” Tyler told the New York Times. “If you’re really focused on getting better, you go play pro somewhere. Pro guys will get you way better than playing against college guys.”
There’s so much short-sightedness in this, I almost feel sorry for the young man. What’s worse is that there are people who will take up for this illogic.
I’m not sure his comment about off-court things is accurate, but even if we say that it is for the sake of argument, that can’t be dismissed in such a blasé fashion. Many players have failed in professional sports because they were immature off the playing field and couldn’t take care of themselves – not because they weren’t good enough or talented enough. Look at just about any high draft pick that proved to be a bust, and you can probably find something off the playing field as a big reason. A large reason players succeed or fail is how they manage themselves away from the game – not unlike why people in other fields succeed or fail, interestingly enough.
The most problematic comment is the last one in that quote, and it’s the kind of illogic that has shown up time and time again on this matter. If you’re really focused on getting better, you go play against good competition, period, and at game speed. Tyler could have gone to a prep school next year, which would accomplish that, and a year in the Big East – let’s not forget all the hyperbole about how amazing the Big East is nowadays – would help there as well.
In Europe, he could very easily not earn a lot of minutes, especially given that he didn’t dominate here like his physical gifts would dictate he should, and thus not progress much at all. Many have a theory that a player will improve more by going up against professionals in practice than he would by playing major minutes in college games. But it’s just that – theory. Players and coaches alike will tell you there is a difference between practice speed and game speed. The reality is a player improves more by playing 30 minutes a game than he does by playing 15-20 minutes a game. How much do you think William Avery improved by hardly getting off the bench for the Minnesota Timberwolves? Is it possible he would have improved a little more by playing 30-35 minutes a game in the ACC?
The economic arguments made for this make no sense. One would say, why play more basketball for free when he can get paid? It’s a compelling argument at first glance, especially when one reads in the story that he’ll probably make six figures, but it doesn’t meet up with reality.
For starters, even one year of a college education is hardly free. College costs continue to escalate; according to a recent issue of BusinessWeek, college tuition and fees rose 5.8 percent from December 2007 to December 2008, a faster pace than the rise of hospital and related costs. There are many people who would love to have a year of free education – even student-athletes. But this is also the age-old, but now very timely, question of instant versus deferred gratification. Of course, we’re in a day where everyone wants instant gratification, so getting six figures right now sounds good, and that’s probably a big reason Tyler has a lot of supporters.
Let’s say Tyler doesn’t pan out, which is certainly a possibility; he is hardly a can’t-miss prospect. What happens then? He will not have enough money to last a lifetime. He will have no college eligibility, meaning he can’t get an athletic scholarship and will have to pay his own way if he even goes to college. Of course, he has to earn his high school diploma first – he’s dropping out of high school. Brandon Jennings has a high school diploma at the moment.
Let’s also consider another factor: quality of life. Sometimes money alone doesn’t cut it, even though it’s the first thing many look at. Tyler is going to be a kid in a country he doesn’t know, playing with a bunch of grown-ups. It’s not like he’ll be making six figures playing in a league here in the United States, one he’s quite familiar with and where he probably has family and friends in a few cities. Consider an engineer taking a job that pays $150,000 at a company that routinely loses people because of bad management, demands lots of unpaid overtime and is over an hour commute from home, as opposed to one that pays $90,000 at a company that’s thriving, well-managed and is 15 minutes from home. The former job might pay more, but is it really the better job, unless one is hurting for money in the worst way?
Remember, this is a kid we’re talking about. He doesn’t “get” these kind of non-monetary considerations yet. I didn’t when I was 17, either. In fact, there’s a lot about life I didn’t get when I was 17 that I do now in my early 30s. And it’s clear from his comments that he can’t handle even a small amount of adversity, the kind of adversity that’s mild compared to what gets thrown at a grownup.
Tyler told the New York Times that this will “help me get better and grow up”. It’s fair to say he’ll have to do a great deal of both, and fast. Otherwise, that fast buck he’s dropping out of school for will be about all he makes from this.
