- Joined
- Mar 8, 2012
- Messages
- 2,694
- Reaction Score
- 10,880
There is the Emeka comment! My rational says the majority of the time, higher ranked players that have been analyzed by people much smarter than you or I, turn out to be better prospects at the collegiate and pro level. Yes there are exceptions such as Emeka. It did take Emeka three years to get to that point. Also KO knows and believes that some players will be more beneficial, and that's why he offered players at much earlier stages and has had them on campus and performed in home visits. There is priority here. He believes Diamond Stone will be more beneficial because he has put in the time. I don't know what else there is to say. You have a terrible argument. It's idiotic.
Outside of the top 10 players in a class, I would say that within the top 100 there is almost no correlation between a players ranking and how good that player turns out to be. And when you're dealing with a top 10 player, the potential of having him for only one year decreases his value to a program when weighed against multiple years of a lower ranked player still in the top 100.
This isn't even considering a players mental ability, his ability to be a team player, get along with his teammates, stay out of trouble, take care of his academics, etc.
And it took Emeka 3 years to become a very good college player? That's the dumbest thing you've posted in this thread. Maybe you don't watch UCONN basketball.