Discussion in 'Sports' started by kidbourbon, Feb 25, 2012.
UK against the Charlotte Bobcats. Neutral court.
Ridiculous thread, Kidb. Bobcats would demolish.
You operate under the assumption that I handicapped it a certain way? Just play bookie and set the spread. I want to see where people set it.
To really be accurate, I would want to know if its a college shot clock, 2 halves, and 5 fouls? Or NBA rules? Just throwing it out there for fun, I'd say:
halftime spread, Charlotte -6. Final score, Charlotte -12. O/U 157
Let's play it with college rules.
Probably the same line at -12, with an O/U at 145
I give your team more credit. Or the Bobcats less credit.
Bobcats-7.5 at a neutral site.
If they played a 7-game series, with all the games at Rupp, I don't think the Bobcats would sweep. And I'm being completely serious. FWIW, Larry Brown and Gary Williams agree.
7.5?! The Bobcats win by at LEAST 15. Under NBA rules, we're talking double that. They might win one fluky game if they shot like 60% or Charlotte was in the 20s, but that's as far as it goes.
Talk to Larry Brown.
Charlotte wins big now but I wonder what the spread would be if you could take those UK players and assume they've stayed 4 years and were seniors.
If Larry Brown really thinks that only playoff teams could beat Kentucky, he is most certainly outside his mind on this one. And like I said, under NBA rules it would be straight nasty. You can't exactly work a six-man rotation for 48 minutes.
I don't like Kentucky's chances under NBA rules for the reason you mentioned. They don't go deep enough. But under college rules where depth isn't going to come into play nearly as much, or even at all, I don't see Charlotte having a major advantage. I believe Kentucky would have the two best players on the floor.
Gary Williams didn't opine on the Bobcats, but said they could beat the Wizards -- he didn't say every time, but in a single game -- if they played at Rupp Arena.
I think the biggest question is what rules they play under. Under college rules, Kentucky isn't getting worked over by a team like the Bobcats. The talent differential isn't that significant when you're just looking at the first 6 (or 7). Under NBA rules, again, I don't like their chances. Which is why I made the hypo college rules. It makes it more interesting.
Davis and MKG aren't going to be nearly as good during their rookie seasons as they will be later. Guys like Kemba Walker, D.J. Augustin and even D.J. White were All-Americans in college. Even if we don't take depth into account, they could easily put a top-10 draft pick at every position. Gerald Henderson is much better than Lamb, they have a shot-blocker of their own in Biyombo, and the schemes on both ends of the court are generally much more complicated in the NBA. College rules would make it closer, but Charlotte still wins 9 times out of 10.
I can't really disagree with this. I do think Davis will be immediately very good, but you didn't deny that.
Nor will I. I think he'll be worth 10-15 wins (after we project this season's records out to a full 82 games) for whichever team wins the lottery.
Steve Nash and Dan Patrick.
DP: Do you agree with Charles Barkley that Kentucky might beat the Charlotte Bobcats?
SN: I got the Bobcats. I think Kentucky probably has more talent. But the guys are young. Their bodies are young. Those guys are kids. There are some men on the Bobcats. If [the] Kentucky [guys] all played until they were seniors, it would probably be interesting.
Separate names with a comma.