Blake Murphy Sports Writing

Title: Developing the D-League
Date: March 27, 2008
Original Source: Hoops Addict
Synopsis: This Hoops Addict article took a look at the NBA’s Developmental League, and how it could grow from a business and basketball standpoint to continue to serve its purpose as a viable feeder system for the NBA. Like all of my HA articles, the links have been lost due to a server transfer, but the text was backed up.

I need to disclaim from the get go that I appreciate and look up to the way David Stern has handled and developed the D-League so far. What follows is by no means a criticism of Stern or his reign as commissioner, but rather a look at the current shape of the league and where I would go with it from here.

In 2001, David Stern announced the creation of the National Basketball Development League. Since collective bargaining rules had changed the control NBA teams had over the players they drafted and especially since the draft had been shortened to two rounds in 1989, NBA scouts and general managers had a hellacious time scouting young talent. Though NCAA basketball provides a plethora of good basketball players, a lot of them leave school early or are simply not ready for the big time after four (or five) years of college seasoning. Additionally, with small-market leagues like the CBA and ABA all over the United States, a team needed a large staff of scouts and a big-time travel budget to have a chance at finding a diamond in the rough. While globalization and technology has made this a degree easier in recent times, the NBA was seriously lacking a centralized area for scouting and player development. The NHL has the AHL, baseball has the most elaborate minor league system you could imagine, and the NFL has 53-man rosters plus practice squads. The NBA was behind the curve, especially in a sport where rosters are limited to 15, young players play a vital role, and injuries are commonplace.

Enter David Stern in the 2001 offseason. Finally giving in to demand from general managers and owners around the league, Stern announced the NBA’s new partnership with the National Basketball Development League. For several years the NBA kept the D-League at arm’s length, providing funding and organizational consulting only. In 2005, though, Stern announced a plan to expand the league to fifteen teams and make it a true minor-league system. The idea was not without its problems though.
Foremost, general managers around the league were skeptical of some of the markets teams were in. While Stern has encouraged franchise owners to purchase local D-League affiliates, the change has been slow and teams have struggled from a financial standpoint (eight teams have gone defunct since 2001). The result is that there is constant worry of team turnover, posing a logistical nightmare for NBA teams. The attitude around the league appears to be changing though, as several owners and markets have expressed interest in D-League teams and the league as a whole has stayed above water in financial terms.

A final concern of general managers is about the control they have over their players. Since the D-League teams operate as individual entities, they have their own coaching and training staffs. This means players sent to the ‘D’ are not guaranteed appropriate minutes and guidance, which has made some GMs especially shy of sending players down.

The league has come a long way since 2001, and again since 2005, but there are improvements to be made. The Martin Luther King Showcase is a fantastic idea and gets the league a great deal of publicity, plus it’s a scouting haven once-a-year for players and NBA teams to enjoy. For those unaware, the MLK Showcase is a three-day event where every D-League team plays two games at a single gym so that scouts from all over can see every player at once and up-close. I have a few ideas that aim to solve some of the aforementioned problems with the league but are more generally aimed at further developing the development league as a true farm system.

Point One: Encourage Team Ownership
With 14 teams currently in the league, there are more than two NBA affiliates per team. One way to expand the league, fix this conflict of interest, and secure the financial success of teams is to offer NBA franchises incentives to purchase their own affiliates. The San Antonio Spurs have done this (Austin Toros) and so have the Los Angeles Lakers (Los Angeles D-Fenders), and both enjoy the only exclusive affiliate rights in the league. The Utah Jazz just purchased a team, the Utah Flash, for next season, as well. Convincing teams is difficult because attendance is likely to be low (attendance in smaller/older markets have been better thus far) but the incentives you can offer NBA franchises are limitless. Foremost, you can offer control over the coaching staff, which makes the team a breeding ground for future coaches and allows players to learn a system as they develop rather than on the fly. You can additionally offer the exclusivity of affiliation I mentioned before, ensuring that your resources aren’t devoted to the development of opposing players.

Point Two: Expand the Season
Right now the D-League plays a 50 game regular season, which is fine with a 14 team league. The problem arises in that the league’s goal should be to try and acclimate players with the NBA game, so a more arduous schedule, while logistically difficult, could prove monumental in helping call-ups avoid the ‘rookie walls’ and ‘sophomore slumps’ associated with increases in game totals. Expanding the season will also increase revenues for profitable teams and give scouts more opportunity to see players play. The longer season would also prevent D-Leaguers from spending the last month or two of the NBA season sitting on a bench watching, potentially losing confidence or becoming frustrated. A final note is that the longer season should, in theory, lead to greater player development simply via more practices and floor time.

Point Three: Increase the Number of Player Allocations Allowed
According to the current collective bargaining agreement, NBA teams can assign “two first or second year players” and “NBA teams can call up players as much as they like but a player can only be sent down three times per season.” Obviously this is much more than teams were afforded before the D-League, but it is still much too restricting for a minor league system. Thus, the most important move to make for the ‘D’ is to increase the number and flexibility of allocation slots. Unfortunately, this proves a little tricky.

Foremost, the NBA will have to change its roster composition. Currently there are 12 active roster spots and three spots for ‘inactive’ players, which include the injured, the D-leagued, and extra players not in the rotation. Well, my plan makes this a little difficult to balance. I think, though, that the current structure could work if GMs were willing to commit to D-Leaguing some players for an entire season. Realistically you will not be calling up more than two or three players throughout the course of the season, unless it’s to check on their development, so with the current roster structure in tact this next change actually provides an extra incentive for NBA teams to own their affiliate, since they can check the development of their young players in real time.

The suggestion, then, is to increase the number of allowable signed D-League players for an NBA team from two to five. The first two would follow current NBA roster rules (on the inactive list, can be called up three times), but the additional three would be strictly development players, not on the NBA roster (similar to European players in the current system) but controlled by the NBA team. Just as important, if you were a ‘development player’ only, this would not count as a year of service in the NBA (since you have no chance of being called up). Another key element is to eliminate the ‘rookies and sophomores only’ qualification for the D-League. Older players and even players rehabbing from injury should be afforded the opportunity. The major change I propose, to summate, is to increase the number of players NBA teams can control from two to five and open it to players of all experience levels, with the additional three players being termed ‘development players’ and not having their years in the D-League count as NBA years.

The effect of this change is several-fold. Foremost, it gives teams increased incentive to purchase and support affiliate D-League franchises by offering greater control and an improved range of benefits from the farm system. Additionally, players benefit with the increased time allowed in the league, the increased attention and focus from an NBA-calibre staff, and a greater chance of being noticed by a big-league team without the hassle of finding a new team every season. The drawback here is that this model provides an incentive for college players to leave early, so it will take a league-wide commitment to negate this effect (or David Stern’s recent suggestion of an age-20 draft minimum).

Point Three-B: Other Allocation Rules
This is not its own point because it is a minor one, but under the terms of the D-League establishment there are some bizarre going-ons. Foremost, players sign with the league, are then drafted in an annual D-League draft, and then signed by their individual teams. Remaining players are then allocated to teams based on need and fit (e.g. playing in Texas if you are a Longhorn alumnus), with one of the 12 roster spots being guaranteed to the best player from a local try-out. All of these quirks are nice in a cuddly way but definitely detract from the quality of the league and long-term management of the teams. The contract rules also need to be explained and made public – why is it the Clippers can ‘sign’ Andre Barrett to a 10-day contract and when it expires he goes back to the Austin Toros? It seems strange that a player could be signed to two teams at once, and the specific workings of the NBA/D-League relationship needs to be made transparent.

Point Four: Integration
Obviously, the NBA has moved to integrating operations with the D-League, but this needs to extend further. Sure, the NBA helps organize the league and runs their website for them, but the NBA basically needs to run the NBDL as if it were the NBA itself. Integrating the websites to a greater degree (ticket sales, cross-promotional marketing, combining NBDL and NBA player pages, etc) will give the ‘D’ a more professional and marketable look. Speaking of marketing, the NBA could certainly lend some of its marketing muscle, especially in ‘dual markets’ where NBA franchises own their affiliates. There are obvious economies of scale to owning two franchises in the same industry and teams can leverage these to help sell D-League teams to fans. Allowing teams complete control over affiliates will align the goals of the two franchises and make all of this more feasible and desirable.

So there it is, a plan that would undoubtedly have Bryan Colangelo drooling over his ensuing THIRD round draft pick in 2009 (I joke). Seriously though, I think this is a manageable plan for the D-League that would accomplish three important goals that the league was established to reach: the sustainability of D-League teams; further ability to build and develop young players in an NBA atmosphere, and; provide NBA teams with improved scouting and development resources. I feel David Stern, if left in his position in the long term, will eventually move towards changes like these. That’s commendable, but I’m disappointed there haven’t been more changes of this scale other than shortening the name to “The D-League” and introducing the awesome MLK Showdown.

Oh, and if you think this is a waste of time because D-League players are not NBA calibre, take a look at this brief list of undrafted, D-League, or European talent that NBA teams missed out on: Anthony Parker, Kelenna Azubuike, Ben Wallace, Matt Barnes, Mikki Moore, Devin Brown, Bobby Simmons, Chris Andersen, Jamario Moon, Bruce Bowen, Chucky Atkins, and more. Those are all NBA contributors that scouts missed the boat on the first time around and took far too long to break through.

Special thanks to Matt from Hardwood Paroxysm for his input on this article.