Duke vs. UNC
On paper....who do you think benefits the most from a possible NBA lockout and why?
You forgot one matchup
Krzyzewski - Williams
I may be slightly biased, but game, set, match to Duke.
Anyway, back to the topic ... hard to say who comes out ahead until we see KI and Barnes on the court and see how Plumlees step up as PT increases. I tend to think Duke benefits more because I think, no matter how polished and skilled the PG, a soph PG will be much better in year 2 than year 1 (see Jason Williams for example, who was spectacular coming out of high school but had ups and downs in a very good freshman year).
More than anyone, Kentucky wins. Between Duke and UNC it is pretty close. We both stand to lose one very talented freshman to the draft.
I don't know, UNC's starting lineup in 2011 looks like it has the potential to be pretty good. I think we have the advantage at both guard positions, but they have perhaps a slight advantage inside - a lot remains to be seen of course, but Henson and Zellar have gotten more PT than the Plumlees and from that standpoint have shown more thus far. Both teams also bring in a ton of talent off the bench, but I think Duke has more depth.
As for the topic of this thread, I'd have to say that if there is in fact a lockout which causes everyone to stay in school, UNC would benefit more. For Duke the lockout would only affect Irving and possibly Mason While losing these two would obviously hurt, I think we have enough other pieces to make up for it - play Rivers at the point, and rotate Kelly/Adams/Thornton at the 4. For UNC the lockout could affect Barnes, Henson, Zellar, and if all three of those guys were to leave then they would have no one inside other than PJ Hairston. So yeah, I think UNC has more to lose to the draft than Duke.
Also, its pretty unlikely that Rivers would be playing out-of-position-PG as a rookie, especially is Seth Curry is in the fold. Assuming Irving leaves, Thornton/Curry would play point while Rivers played #2 or wing.
That said, I agree Carolina has more to gain because our two most important pieces: Smith and Singler, are gone no matter what happens in NBA.
My knowledge is somewhat limited but I was under the impression that Rivers is more suited to play the 1, and projects to play PG in the NBA, while Curry is more of a pure shooter who could share PG duties only if needed. Curry would have more experience, which is a good reason to play him at the point, but I wouldn't be surprised to give the ball to Rivers either. At any rate, our backcourt will be loaded even after losing Nolan and (maybe) Irving.
If there is a lockout, how much would possible endorsement money factor into underclassmen's decisions? If Kyrie has a year like John Wall last year, Nike could give him a few million reasons to leave regardless of whether he's getting an nba check. Unfortunately, I'd be surprised if the same sort of shoe money was out there for Kyle. Hopefully it won't be an issue and the NBA will avoid a work-stoppage.
In spite of an expected NBA lockout in 1998, lots of underclassmen left early (Mike Bibby, Antawn Jamison, Vince Carter, and others were all lottery picks). As long as there's a draft, I don't imagine early entry tailing off too much.
Nike could probably offer contracts with qualifiers. A player could get a certain amount of money up front. Then the rest of their money would be adjusted according to their draft position and so forth.
Rivers over Bullock (several scouts think Bullock will be average the first 2 years at UNC)
Barnes over Curry (I would match Dawkin's against Barnes and that might be a push, Curry is too small)
Plumlee 1, Plumlee 2, Kelly and Hairston push against Henson, Zeller and MacAdoo (Henson is only good for blocking shots, Zeller will cause problems for the Plumlees cause he can mover and MacAdoo maybe too raw)
There may be something good coming out of the upcoming collective bargaining negotiations.
Many coaches are lobbying the owners to morph the college-NBA relationship into more of a baseball situation. Yeah, kids are allowed to go straight into the pros, but if they choose college, then they are obligated to stay for more than a year before they are again draft eligible. There are a lot of nuances to such an agreement (e.g., where does the NBDL fit in, are rookie contracts guaranteed if a player doesn't make the NBA roster, etc).
It will be interesting to see what happens.
Another thing to consider: despite an NBA lockout, drafted players could go over and play in Europe!!