December 29, 2011; Houston, TX, USA; San Antonio Spurs forward Kawhi Leonard (2) looks to pass the ball in the third quarter against the Houston Rockets at Toyota Center. Mandatory Credit: Troy Taormina-US PRESSWIRE

First off: I’m not a proponent of the NBA’s proposed under-23 rule that would revolutionise basketball internationally — for better or for worse.

Lost in the debate on whether NBA teams actually deserve the ability to “protect” the most essential cogs in the hierarchy — ie: superstars — is that perhaps it’s not so much the proposal that is flawed, but the arbitrary age that is associated with the preposition.

To wit: Is a 24 year old superstar really that much more valuable than a 23 year old superstar? Nonsense.

The proposed age limit, while not ideal because it would trivialize basketball as an Olympic sport, is far more damaging than simply preventing veterans from competing for a gold medal. The decision, meanwhile, coincides with the immense amount of young players that have the opportunity to leave a tangible dent in international history.

Perhaps in 2016 but more likely in succeeding Games, the effect of iconic athletes like Kobe Bryant or LeBron James would be lost. They would still influence the sport, of course, but the nature of the Olympics — and the eclectic crowds that generally tune in to watch — allows a casual fan base to enjoy basketball by watching the best players in the world. A dent would be made should they succeed in the World Cup, yes, but not quite on the same scale.

The rule, by way of attrition, constricts the demographic to basketball fans, potentially eliminating interest as it’s unlikely the forthcoming World Cup ever reaches the prominence of the Olympics.

Also: This means that players like Derrick Rose, Kyrie Irving, Eric Gordon, LaMarcus Aldridge, Kawhi Leonard, DeMarcus Cousins, Andrew Bynum and Greg Monroe would never be fortunate enough to experience the seminal larger than life sporting event.

Within the confines of the Team USA program, every player regardless of stature, fits into one singular goal — winning a gold medal. The experience is one that adds a bit of perspective to players that lose sight of the object of basketball — playing as a team, treating each other as a team and, ideally, winning as a team.

Shouldn’t we allow the dynamic market of young superstars the chance to capitalize on that rare opportunity?

It has been an excellent year for LeBron James — who officially solidified his spot as the best player in the world.

His inner demons are gone, his scowl is gone and finally basketball fans can simply appreciate him at the pinnacle of his career, which looks pretty darn good.

Suffice to say, this calendar year has been the perfect example of catharsis. He’s a completely rejuvenated player, and one with a lot more hardware — he earned his third MVP award, first NBA Championship and another gold medal.

James will be 31 by the next Olympics and seemingly able enough to dominate international play again. But, while it’s hard to prognosticate four years in the future, will James decide that he’s had enough? He’s not sure but he gave the indication that he may sit out in 2016.

    “It’s been a great run honestly,” James said. “I don’t know if I’m going to be part of the 2016 team.”

On the surface, it sounds absurd to believe that James will not be apart of the next Team USA squad, especially considering a gold medal would give him three, or one more than the immortal Michael Jordan.

But if James is continually asked to play multiple positions, and expound a ton of energy covering for Miami’s deficiencies, his body, as indomitable as it may be, will age considerably in that four year span.

Should he leave, there likely won’t be a player that can realistically fill his void. He averaged 13.2 points, 5.6 rebounds, 5.6 assists while shooting 60.3% from the field. His decision making — James’ assist-to-turnover ratio was a gaudy 5.63 — and defensive versatility aren’t represented in those numbers either.

This isn’t to say that the United States won’t be favored to win the gold without James. They will. Kevin Durant, Derrick Rose, Dwight Howard, Anthony Davis, Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook and Kyrie Irving are potent enough to beat any team.

Whether the best player in the world joins them will be irrelevant. That isn’t a knock on James, rather an example of the depth in the Team USA program, as his intentional resume will withstand the tests of time — with or without another medal in 2016.

Hat-tip to Matt Moore of Pro Basketball Talk.