If Jabari Parker stayed at Duke for another season, it would have been an unprecedented move in recent college basketball history. No player in his position (number two projected pick in one of the most stacked drafts of all time) has ever returned. Players in much worse positions have left. Some used to do so directly out of high school when that was an approved pathway.

Parker teased the country for a while, but ultimately made the declaration everyone expected to hear. The only surprise was how he did it: via a first-person account in Sports Illustrated (which is typically a more ESPN the Mag move) on Thursday.

Nothing Parker said in his 1,300 word entry, however, was really that surprising. Holding him back were all previously reported reasons, such as the first round loss in the NCAA Tournament, emotional connections with his teammates, the even greater connection he shared with Mike Kryzewski, the personal fulfillment he found in the classroom, the chance to play with hometown friend Jahlil Okafor, etc. Just like his game, Parker's personality seems tailor-made for NBA success. NBA general managers should be pleased with Parker's straightforward explanation and his obvious reverence for the professional game.

More interesting were the reasons Parker gave for entering the draft at this time, and what those reasons mean.

"Ultimately, I boiled my decision down to two simple questions:

Which environment -- college or the NBA -- offers me the best opportunity to grow as a basketball player?

Which environment -- college or the NBA -- offers me the best opportunity to grow and develop off the court?

The answer to both questions is undeniably the NBA," Parker wrote.

Parker's statements -- and his first year at Duke -- embody the difference between the college and NBA game. Watching him consistently beat his man at Duke only to be thwarted by clogged lanes filled with help defenses and players readying themselves for charges, one can't help but anticipate the 25 to 30 point nights he'll have in the more spacious NBA. (Plus, offense is one of Coach K's weakest coaching points.)

The distinction between the two styles of basketball begs the question to which Parker believes he already has the answer: Which environment actually offers him the best opportunity to grow as a basketball player?

If Parker's game is built for the NBA as it seems it is, could he possibly gain more from first mastering the sometimes trickier college game? I think he could. Maybe Parker is worried about the now requisite 5-8 seasons it takes to master the NBA and break through for that first title (like in the careers of MJ, Lebron, Kobe, etc.). He'd presumably rather be in his mid to late 20s when that happens rather than his late 20s to early 30s.

Yet, imagine if he entered the league after four seasons at Duke (and most likely at least one national championship). Instead of a 19 year-old rookie, he'd be coming in as something of a respected veteran. He'd know what it was like to win and would likely turn whomever drafted him into a playoff team right away. Individually, his finishing ability would be airtight. Probably, his shot would need more work than it would have had he left early and gained more access to a gym and individual coaching. Even so, I think he'd be a better player in the long term after a four-year career than a one-year one. After all, what did Kobe and now Lebron really learn after they turned 28? Parker would have his special four-year learning training experience and still be improving into his 30's.

"After losing in the NCAA tournament, I needed to clear my mind," Parker wrote in his opening paragraph. "I was incredibly disappointed and blamed myself. I didn't watch basketball or go to the gym for several days. But I soon realized the real test is how we handle defeat and I laced my shoes and headed to the student rec center to play some pick-up."

For Parker, handling defeat was more about avoiding his short-term desires related to college and embracing his long term goal of becoming an NBA player. Staying at school, however, could have solved both problems.