NBA set to institute age limit
-errors are numbered and explained below 
With the National Basketball Association’s collective bargaining agreement set to
expire this June, it is likely a league age limit will be instituted. According to
ESPN.com’s Chad Ford, the players association and the league owners have (1) discussed
a number of changes to the current agreement, most notably the inclusion of an age limit,
(2) which would go into effect for the 2006 draft. Currently, American players may
declare for the NBA draft immediately after graduating high school, while international
prospects must be at least 18 years old. The age limit being discussed would force
American players to wait two years after their high school class has graduated, while
international players must be 20.
The rule change would allow unprepared league prospects to improve their
abilities in college before they declare for the draft. . . The new age limit would also
protect the NBA veterans, (4) allowing them to keep their jobs longer, instead of teams
cutting them for a prospect based on potential. Finally, the NBA reportedly finds it
difficult to market young players and have been more economically successful when
established players are the face of the league.
If an age limit is instituted (passive change?..If the league institutes an age limitactive voice may be clearer), the league (they) (5) can expect to be challenged in court.
The NFL has a similar age limit, which recently held up in court after being challenged
by Maurice Clarett. The new collective bargaining agreement will also reportedly
include rules shortening the length of player contracts, lessening their raises, attempting
to make it easier to trade players, and possibly creating a minor league system. Still, the
proposed age limit is the most notable ammendment. For every LeBron James there are
ten Lenny Cookes, and the NBA is attempting to put an end to that trend.
Okay here are my marks explained:
(1) I took out have because I think the sentence makes sense without it, and I’m not
sure if you want to keep the piece as concise as possible.
(2) ‘which’ signals a relative clause which is a form of a dependent clause
(3) – (4): who actually does the same thing at ‘which’-the sentence before the comma
can stand on their own without the clause after the comma, but it doesn’t work the
other way around
(5) I’m not sure if you want me to change passive voice where appropriate. I made a
suggestion for this sentence, but it makes sense either way
I hope this is sort of what you are looking for- going to rest now-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here are My Changes ( I also don’t know why this is coming out in underline, I cant
seem to fix it)
1) I changed around the opening sentence a little just to make it smoother and a little
more concise.
2) I eliminated the first sentence in the 2nd paragraph because it is unnecessary.
The previously 2nd sentence of that paragraph, which is now the lead sentence was
awkward. I changed the words around but kept the sentiment as best I could.
3) I changed job to jobs, we are talking about NBA veterans, not veteran.
4) I also disagree w/ previous change of “the league” to they. It is a new paragraph
and the league needs to be specified.
5) [for it]- not sure if this is necessary, might be able to assume why the league
would be challenged in court]
6) Changed the word “tried” to “challenged” in the Clarett sentence. Clarett did not
try the case, a judge did, Clarett challenged it.
7) Took out an “and” in the middle of a list, and should only be after the last article
of a list. Also put a period after the list when there was a comma and another
sentence.
8) Changed the following sentence accordingly.
I hope you approve of these changes. I’ve never edited before so I don’t
know If I overstepped my bounds, I just changed stuff that was either
incorrect or I just really didn’t like. Lmk if I should take a step back in sort
of “rewriting” sentences in the other articles. Thanks.
-Seth