4 and 5 star players are, generally, good. They are physical freaks at the very front of the development/maturation curve for 17 year olds. They also tend to have more data backing them. Some have the desire to continue to improve as they move to college, some don't and will fade. If they are good fits, we should want them (though it's not quite realistic at this time that they choose UConn for a variety of reasons).
Beyond that, as others have noted, stars are crap shoots, being generated on progressively less and less data. These guys are developing at a more "normal" pace for a 17 year old - they haven't peaked yet. Do they want to? Some will, many won't.
Regardless of stars, slapping a label on a 17 year old and drawing some conclusion as to their football ceiling 4 years out is an exercise in stupidity.
You still do have to evaluate talent and find good fits - the RKGs. So how do you find the diamonds in the rough? You look for high integrity, highly motivated guys who love football and want to outwork the other kids in in the same bucket. Diaco's approach is just plain logical. Then, if you are competent (unlike PP), you coach them, teach them, develop them physically.
You don't NEED 4/5* recruits to do well, but they help get you there quicker. 2/3* recruits aren't a death sentence, but you had better be good at evaluating talent, developing it, and out working folks.
Bringing it back to Byron - maybe he WAS a two star recruit at 17... But frankly, who cares? His desire to maximize his talents made that evaluation utterly meaningless.
