Yancy Gates draft projections

[GoBearcats31]

Second round, #23 http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2012/

Second round, #17 http://nbadraft.net/2012mock_draft


Worth noting that Gates was not in either of these mocks one month ago and he wasn't listed on nbadraft.net until today (And is already midway through second round).

[BasketBySteveLogan]

Defense and rebounding along with a soft shooting touch and decent explosiveness around the rim combined with his size should be enough for a team to take a flyer on Yancy.. and put him in the D-League to work on his game.

It's all up to him if he makes it to a roster from there.

If he could bottle the energy/effort he showed on Senior night and the Big East tournament on offense and the glass, I can see him on a team down the road... but right now, he's still a little too timid and shies away from imposing his will.

Mick said in a presser than he's probably a few years away from being who he is as a bball player. Some time in the D-League or overseas could really help his game and if you read his draftexpress profile, the guy talks about his footwork/posture on his jumpshot --- if he can shore that up he definitely has the touch to be a consistent 15-19 foot jumpshooter, which is what an NBA 4-man needs to have.

I hope he puts it together and makes it.

[Binturong05]

The profile in the first link sounds accurate. Interesting to read their rationale for Gates not being consistently aggressive - e.g. he never had to until he entered college due to his immense size and as a result acquired some bad habits including a disposition of not being consitently 'mean' in the post.

Wish him all the best. Would love to have something to care about with respect to the NBA. Sadly, at this time I couldn't care less about professional basketball and the lack of defense in that league.

On a side note, I heard the NBA commissioner said he was in agreement with increasing the restriction to play in the NBA from one year removed from HS to two years. Seems this is in deference to college basketball pressuring the NBA. I hope the NBA does not move to implement this rule and in fact I'd prefer they get rid of the one-year rule and just go back to letting guys enter the draft right out of HS. I see no reason to bar a young man from getting paid for his God given talents and forcing him into indentured servitude at some college where he's going to make a mockery of the 'student' part of the term student athlete. If you're only in school because you can't go to the NBA you certainly aren't there for the education and it's setting up schools and athletic programs for violations by forcing kids to go to college that have no reason to be there other than being prohibited from playing professionally in the NBA.

[weez1414]

If your a scout you know what skills he possesses, It's just the huslte factor, and they will make you huslte and give %100 if you want to play if not you can make a great living over seas. But everyone in this city knows he is an athletic freak. Good Luck Big Fella

[Helicopter]

Originally Posted by Binturong05

The profile in the first link sounds accurate. Interesting to read their rationale for Gates not being consistently aggressive - e.g. he never had to until he entered college due to his immense size and as a result acquired some bad habits including a disposition of not being consitently 'mean' in the post.

Wish him all the best. Would love to have something to care about with respect to the NBA. Sadly, at this time I couldn't care less about professional basketball and the lack of defense in that league.

On a side note, I heard the NBA commissioner said he was in agreement with increasing the restriction to play in the NBA from one year removed from HS to two years. Seems this is in deference to college basketball pressuring the NBA. I hope the NBA does not move to implement this rule and in fact I'd prefer they get rid of the one-year rule and just go back to letting guys enter the draft right out of HS. I see no reason to bar a young man from getting paid for his God given talents and forcing him into indentured servitude at some college where he's going to make a mockery of the 'student' part of the term student athlete. If you're only in school because you can't go to the NBA you certainly aren't there for the education and it's setting up schools and athletic programs for violations by forcing kids to go to college that have no reason to be there other than being prohibited from playing professionally in the NBA.

Whoah, who's being forced into "indentured servitude"? If you call $500,000+/year overseas indentured servitude then sign me up.

[Chips]

Originally Posted by Helicopter

Whoah, who's being forced into "indentured servitude"? If you call $500,000+/year overseas indentured servitude then sign me up.

I think he was referring to the time in college as "indentured servitude". Baseball has it right. If you want to go pro out of high school go right ahead, if not, you have to go to college or whatever for three years before you're eligible for the draft.

[Best Body]

Originally Posted by Chips

I think he was referring to the time in college as "indentured servitude". Baseball has it right. If you want to go pro out of high school go right ahead, if not, you have to go to college or whatever for three years before you're eligible for the draft.

I don't agree. Baseball has a very good minor league system. The NBA D league is a joke for big time prospects. MLB can offer a legitimate alternative to college for aspiring pro players with no interest in academics, whereas the NBA cannot. The NBA is essentially using colleges to be the league's minor league system. Unless the NCAA decides to strictly punish programs for one and done players, the NBA wins, and the student athlete concept is threatened.

It should be up to the individual and the college to determine if and for how long the player attends college. Attending college or not should have nothing to do with a persons eligibility to play professional sports. I think if the player wants to leave after any amount of time, he should have no obligation to stay. It seems like everyone wants to go out of their way to protect a few people from finding out there is no place for them in the NBA before they play a few years of college basketball. Most of those kids that tried to go pro right away and failed (or left college early and failed), and became ineligible to play in college (boo hoo) would not have cared about their education at college anyway, and would not have made it in the league after playing college basketball for a couple more years. They just got to move on to whatever else it is they were going to do, sooner. There are only x number of NBA roster spots - having kids stay in school to improve their shot at the NBA is flawed logic. The same number of players get to go the league, anyway.

The NBA had the correct approach before the one and done. No restrictions.
If Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, etc. etc. want to go pro at 18, fine. If a kid grows as a player after one year of college and wants to go pro, fine. Why else make him continue to pretend to be a college student other than to indenture him to a fanbase?

[DBSUC1982]

Any truth to Kilpatrick "likely entering draft"?
http://nbadraft.net/2012-early-entry-list

[Best Body]

Originally Posted by DBSUC1982

Any truth to Kilpatrick "likely entering draft"?
http://nbadraft.net/2012-early-entry-list

Forget everything I said above! SK should be forced to return & play for UC again.

[GoBearcats31]

Yancy will be participating in the Portsmouth Invitational

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...d-Preview-3885

Top prospects Attending:

Ricardo Ratliffe, Missouri
Yancy Gates, Cincinnati
Henry Sims, Georgetown
Herb Pope, Seton Hall
Jordan Taylor, Wisconsin
JaMychal Green, Alabama
John Shurna, Northwestern
Bernard James, Florida State
Kim English, Missouri
Dee Bost, Mississippi St.
Kevin Murphy, Tennessee Tech
Garrett Stutz, Wichita State
Eric Griffin, Campbell
Alex Young, IUPUI
Casper Ware, Long Beach State
Ashton Gibbs, Pittsburgh
Gus Gilchrist, South Florida
Eli Holman, Detroit
Xavier Gibson, Florida State
Kent Bazemore, Old Dominion
Jorge Gutierrez, Cal

[Binturong05]

Originally Posted by Chips

I think he was referring to the time in college as "indentured servitude". Baseball has it right. If you want to go pro out of high school go right ahead, if not, you have to go to college or whatever for three years before you're eligible for the draft.

Chips, you are correct, I was referring to the near forced entry into college for players who in reality don't have much business there other than prohibition against playing in the NBA.

Originally Posted by Best Body

I don't agree. Baseball has a very good minor league system. The NBA D league is a joke for big time prospects. MLB can offer a legitimate alternative to college for aspiring pro players with no interest in academics, whereas the NBA cannot. The NBA is essentially using colleges to be the league's minor league system. Unless the NCAA decides to strictly punish programs for one and done players, the NBA wins, and the student athlete concept is threatened.

It should be up to the individual and the college to determine if and for how long the player attends college. Attending college or not should have nothing to do with a persons eligibility to play professional sports. I think if the player wants to leave after any amount of time, he should have no obligation to stay.

The NBA had the correct approach before the one and done. No restrictions.
If Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, etc. etc. want to go pro at 18, fine. If a kid grows as a player after one year of college and wants to go pro, fine. Why else make him continue to pretend to be a college student other than to indenture him to a fanbase?

Good points re: comparing the MLB's minor league system vs the NBA and for that matter other sports without a developed farm system. And I'm with you in holding the position that there should be no assumption of commitment either way, whether a player chooses to go right out of high school or to enter college. After all, the non-student athlete is not held to this standard. I gave no commitment to anyone other than myself that I'd stay in college for any length of time. Why should student athletes be forced to play for any number of years? Steve Jobs and Bill Gates both dropped out of college and they weren't forced to return to school or wait out some number of years before they embarked on launching Apple and Microsoft respectively.

My position on this is two-fold. First, as a freedom-loving American who espouses a belief in personal liberty and free enterprise / free markets I see no reason to punitively bar legally-defined adults of the opportunity to earn a living as professional athletes. If a team owner is willing to take a shot on an 18-yr old then who are we to prohibit the formation of a mutually-agreed upon contract of employment between the athlete and the franchise? Particularly with respect to the NBA, the age rule that is currently in place seems arbitrary. At least with the NFL and the physical nature of the sport I can see the reason for concern and why people worry about injury. But even in the case of the NFL I don't think it's a valid argument because, in the end, if a team's GM or owner was concerned about the ability of the player to withstand the physical punishment of NFL play the GM/owner would simply withhold from making the investment in the player (aka: drafting him). Therefore, there would be a de facto age limitation where only those rare exceptions where players who physically mature early (e.g. L'ville's Amobi Okoye was an NFL first round pick at age 19) would be deemed eligible by market forces thereby eliminating the need for a de jure rule on the books. In sum, arbitrary age restrictions that prohibit young adults from exploiting their own God given talents as a means of gainful employment is antithetical to the free market principals this country was founded on and that many of us claim to believe in.

My second argument against the age restriction is that it is actually detrimental to the sport of college basketball and, fairly or unfairly, it tarnishes the perception of the student athlete and even taints the value and prestige of college education.

As mentioned above, the current rules in the NBA and NFL force players into college who might otherwise not have any interest in attending college in an effort to showcase their talents for the professional sports leagues. With all of the mumbo jumbo aside surrounding protecting players from failure and giving them an opportunity at an education (because, frankly, these options would still be available to athletes that willfully choose the collegiate path), the forced participation in collegiate athletics by virtue of the virtual monopoly position the NCAA has on the role of a proxy for a formal and proper minor league farm system makes a mockery of the educational objectives of the nation's universities. We hear time and time again about grade falsification scandals (e.g. Syracuse) and I'm sure we've all witnessed to some degree or at least have heard second hand stories from others who have witnessed various high profile college athletes that have blown off their academic responsibilities and been granted special treatment to ensure their eligibility to participate in sports. I understand that in the world of scholarship athletes this is going to occur everywhere to a certain extent, but the current rules in place exacerbate this phenomenon by prohibiting pro-ready athletes from realistically dropping out of school and going pro. Basically, those most qualified to go pro and therefore those with the least to gain from the monetary benefit of a college education are forced to stay in the pool of student athletes acting as deadweight on the education system due to apathy and lack of participation in the classroom and also by consuming scholarships that could otherwise be used for committed student athletes that may actually increase the classroom experience in the aggregate.

There is also the risk of collateral damage to the reputation of the academic institution due to the public nature of NCAA infractions which can negatively impact the alumni base and degree holders if the public often associates said incident(s) with the school. And you must also consider the ripple effect probation penalties have on other student athletes that had nothing to do with the violations themselves (e.g. banning a team from a bowl years after the violation occurred and many times well after the perpetrator has left the program). Again, I understand that by eliminating the current rules restricting entry into the pros does not completely eliminate this risk but I don't think there's much of an argument that it lowers the probability of occurrance based on the acceptance that those athletes who are being showered with improper benefits are usually athletes with pro-ready talent (e.g. Reggie Bush) and the person giving the gifts/benefits is doing so to curry favor with the athlete in hopes of some return on this favor when the athlete inevitably goes pro. Therefore, by permitting certain pro-ready athletes to leave whenever they wish you reduce the number of pro-ready athletes unnecessarily forced to participate in college and this reduction in frequency implicitly removes a significant number of opportunities where there is an economic benefit in violating the amateurism rules of the NCAA.

Originally Posted by Best Body

Forget everything I said above! SK should be forced to return & play for UC again.

Haha, I picking up on your sarcasm but your comment brings up a good point. I don't think it's a stretch to claim that those in favor of forced participation in collegiate athletics are primarily going to be the athletic departments with the biggest revenue streams (e.g. Texas, Ohio State, etc), the conferences and directors of those conferences (e.g. Jim Delaney), media outlets with exclusive rights to various conferences (e.g. Big Ten Network, ABC), and the fans of programs that have historically shown they are willing to play the game and maintain the status quo which is basically every team who has benefitted from the current rule system (e.g. USC and Ohio State in football and Kentucky, Syracuse, and UConn in basketball to name a few).

As a fan of UC where it is unlikely that pro-ready high school talent is going to select this university I am not concerned with the reduction in talent at the NCAA level that might transpire should these rules be expunged. This appears obvious to me that UC will be minimally impacted by a rule change because UC football has not demonstrated a willingness to pay-to-play, does not have a fanbase that appears drawn to trying to curry favor with amateur athletes, and frankly historically does not have the mystique of more well financed programs. On the basketball side of things Mick has made it clear he's focused on reducing the exploitation of college athletes and instead ensuring they receive a quality education (e.g. 2012 APR score of 992) instead of following a win-at-all-costs strategy that we witnessed with Bob Huggins where there was little focus on educational success. I will also add that the football program earned academic all conference recognition just a few years ago further supporting the case UC is not likely to feel a major drop off in talent should the rules be changed as discussed above.

[Helicopter]

You keep saying these kids are forced to go to college because of the NBA's rule. That simply isn't true. They can play overseas and make substantial money. Brandon Jennings made this clearly an option.

[Binturong05]

Originally Posted by Helicopter

You keep saying these kids are forced to go to college because of the NBA's rule. That simply isn't true. They can play overseas and make substantial money. Brandon Jennings made this clearly an option.

I believe my exact words were:

the forced participation in collegiate athletics by virtue of the virtual monopoly position the NCAA has on the role of a proxy for a formal and proper minor league farm system

Technically, you're correct in that no one is putting a gun to their heads and forcing them to enroll in college and I conceeded as much when I stated the "virtual monopoly position" of the NCAA. So while a high school athlete is theoretically able to go overseas the path is more cumbersome and it's a steeper hill to climb thereby limiting its practicality and the frequency of occurence.

First, the market for high school talent is not as developed for franchises across the Atlantic as it is for domestic NBA teams and their manifold scouts patroling the nation. I'm not aware that the European teams are actively recruiting high school kids from the time they are sophomores the way colleges are currently doing and we all know the incestuous nature of American college athletics and the pros with many coaches freely moving between both leagues over their careers making many college coaches a de facto scout for the NBA. Second, related to my first point, for all but maybe the top player (I left it singular on purpose) in a given class, the media exposure and hype is likely not significant enough that foreign teams have sufficient awareness of the player's existence, skills, and value making it less likely the athlete will receive fair value for their talents as a result of this informational inefficiency compared to NBA teams that are plugged in with ESPN which is the very same media outlet ranking these players in their top 100 from the time they are in the 10th grade. And third, the human element here is that many of these kids are poor and what the politically correct world refers to as 'disadvantaged.' Many of them haven't left their hometown let alone their country. Therefore, I don't think it's a stretch to say that there's a psychological/emotional barrier prohibitting many of them from considering foreign leagues and this isn't even considering the financial costs of trying to make contact with foreign teams (in the case of Brandon Jennings I'm sure he had a financier, after all he somehow moved out of Compton and crossed the country to attend Oak Hills Prep in Virginia).

In closing, I'm not disagreeing there are other routes to the NBA besides college ball but my position is they are not nearly as practical for the top 10 or so high school athletes that may be deemed pro-ready and are now by default being pressured to enroll in college instead of declaring for the NBA.

[Binturong05]

Stumbled across an article in The Atlantic talking about this very topic. Seems rather apropos at present. Enjoy!

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertain...o-long/255535/

[Best Body]

Originally Posted by Helicopter

You keep saying these kids are forced to go to college because of the NBA's rule. That simply isn't true. They can play overseas and make substantial money. Brandon Jennings made this clearly an option.

Having to go overseas to make a living doing something they should be able to do here is an unfair restriction, and not a viable alternative for some people. Therefore they may just go play college, and totally ignore academics while they are there, as an alternative.

[Chips]

Sorry I checked out for a few days. While I understand the premises presented for not having any restrictions on draft eligibility (I don't entirely disagree), I look at it from a slightly different perspective. The NBA and it's member teams are free employers who can hire whoever they want, based on whatever qualifications they see fit. There goal should be to protect themselves and to put the best possible product of the floor. It is my personal opinion that the MLB model makes sense for a couple reasons.

LaBron is Labron, it wouldn't matter what path he took, his greatness was going to find it's way to the top. He is the exception, and I believe there should be a path for this exception to contribute immediately in the Association.

Without restrictions, executives were taking too many "chances" on kids with potential, resulting in some blown drafts, diluted rosters and lesser teams. Making the borderline talents think twice, should result in a decent portion of them choosing to wait and developing a bit more. Having a deeper pool of more mature and developed players to draft from will result in less "risky" drafts and deeper teams. Excellence will always rise to the top and there will always be great individuals and individual teams. But (again just my opinion) the overall depth of quality player and resulting deeper teams would only make the NBA better.

The side benefit, which I selfishly would like to see, is a deeper pool of talent still in the NCAA, increasing the level of play.

[levydl]

Originally Posted by Chips

Sorry I checked out for a few days. While I understand the premises presented for not having any restrictions on draft eligibility (I don't entirely disagree), I look at it from a slightly different perspective. The NBA and it's member teams are free employers who can hire whoever they want, based on whatever qualifications they see fit. There goal should be to protect themselves and to put the best possible product of the floor. It is my personal opinion that the MLB model makes sense for a couple reasons.

LaBron is Labron, it wouldn't matter what path he took, his greatness was going to find it's way to the top. He is the exception, and I believe there should be a path for this exception to contribute immediately in the Association.

Without restrictions, executives were taking too many "chances" on kids with potential, resulting in some blown drafts, diluted rosters and lesser teams. Making the borderline talents think twice, should result in a decent portion of them choosing to wait and developing a bit more. Having a deeper pool of more mature and developed players to draft from will result in less "risky" drafts and deeper teams. Excellence will always rise to the top and there will always be great individuals and individual teams. But (again just my opinion) the overall depth of quality player and resulting deeper teams would only make the NBA better.

The side benefit, which I selfishly would like to see, is a deeper pool of talent still in the NCAA, increasing the level of play.

The MLB model wouldn't fix the "problem" you identify. The top talent would still come out of high school, since it's clear they can hack it in the NBA (the same isn't true in baseball. The last player to go from high school to the majors was Mike Morgan, 35 years ago. Very few baseball players can even go straight to the majors from college. The MLB-NBA comparison is a poor one). So the risk of apparently incompetent GMs misevaluating high school talent would still exist, and with the prospect of having to go to college for 3 years, I imagine even more players would enter the draft out of high school.

Think of last year's draft, for example. Kyrie Irving played 11 games in college, yet he was the top pick, even coming off an injury. Enes Kanter, the 3rd pick, didn't even play his freshman year before entering the draft. Is there any doubt these two would be high lottery picks out of high school?

[GoBearcats31]

7 points, 9 rebounds tonight in 29 minutes.
http://www.portsmouthinvitational.co...12_Game_5.html

Will go up against 7-footer Garrett Stutz (Wichita) and Ricardo Ratliffe (Mizzou) tomorrow

[Bearcat Otto]

Originally Posted by GoBearcats31

7 points, 9 assists tonight in 29 minutes.
http://www.portsmouthinvitational.co...12_Game_5.html

Will go up against 7-footer Garrett Stutz (Wichita) and Ricardo Ratliffe (Mizzou) tomorrow

9 rebounds

[GoBearcats31]

Originally Posted by Bearcat Otto

9 rebounds

Right, my bad. Fixed.