A reminder to those unfamiliar with the eligibility issues.  If either Gibson or Tucker gets drafted lower than hoped for, YES they may return to college (assuming they are sans agents) to finish their eligibility (for Gibson 1 or 2 more years), and try to improve their skills...

BUT, once they exhaust their eligibility or choose to go to the NBA, their draft rights are owned by the NBA team that took them this year (i.e. they do not re-enter the draft to see if they can go higher.)  Their initial salary would likely still reflect their second round status.

For PJ and Daniel the two best scenarios are (1) get drafted high, or (2) don't get drafted at all.  PJ is probably making the right choice, as he is about as desirable as he can be to the NBA as reigning Big XII POY.  Only a breakout year as a perimeter shooter next season could likely give him a boost.  And Barnes, with the incoming young talents, is not likely to use next season as time to develop PJ in a new role for the NBA.  While PJ is a Longhorn, it is Barnes' job to win now and PJ in the post is far more productive to the team as a whole.

For Daniel, with two year's of eligibility left, you wonder more about a choice to test the waters. First of all, you may only do this once.  Daniel cannot enter his name, get a feel, return for his junior year, and then enter his name again next spring/summer and then return to Texas.  You only are given one free pass by the NCAA.  Right now all we hear from the NBA is how teams are looking at Daniel as a point guard.  One major reason is his size, being too small likely to play the two or the three in the NBA.  Daniel's family (father) has said what we have yet to hear from Daniel.  #1 hopes to have another shot at point gurd for UT.  This appears unlikely with AJ and perhaps an incoming freshman battling for the spot.  Daniel has had his chance, but all too often failed to penetrate in to the paint, where a true PG can then (1) score, (2) draw contact, or (3) draw double coverage, create open shots, and pass the ball out.  If Daniel returns, he likely (like PJ) resumes the role he finished the season with (as the shooting guard).  Again, Barnes and UT are not a rebuilding team.  You can win at this level with freshmen and sophomores.  As the result Gibson would be played where the team needs him (SG) not where the NBA needs him.

To clarify the NBA Draft rules further.  A team who drafts a player owns the exclusive signing rights to that player until one year after the player's eligibility would have expired (assuming four years of college).  If PJ and/or Daniel were drafted and then returned to UT, completed their eligibility and sat out one year, they could then enter their names back in to the draft.  By that time, however, it is hard to imagine the now older and rustier players' stock would be on the rise.

On another side note, you may have noticed all the names you hear with Aldridge, Morrison, etc. for the top pick are those of college players.  No mention of an up and coming high school sensation like LeBron or Garnett.  That is because the NBA last summer raised the Draft eligibility requirements to age 19 during this calendar year, and--for US entrants--one year removed from (after) high school graduation.  This will both help the pay day for the draft-entering collegiate amateurs and deepen the talent even further at the NCAA level.

If I have misstated anything let me know.  With all this in mind, you can understand why both PJ and Daniel may believe this is his best shot to test the draft without making a commitment either way.  And it is obvious the Barnes has enough talent coming in with the current six commitments to prevent BON and its readers from panicking in the reporting and rumors over losing players to the draft.  The addition of one of these other freshmen, as number seven, would simply be icing on the cake.

Update [2006-4-25 0:54:38 by Lincoln]:Appololgies to Andrew for some of the overlapping on my part in the evaluation of Daniel. I just noticed his story entitled "Daniel Gibson's Dilema" on the main page. Andrew has done a good job of even further focusing on Daniel's "dilema" including notes on guaranteed money and the NBDL.