Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="champs99and04, post: 1994160, member: 488"] Given the choice between a three point shooter and a slasher, yeah, I'd take the shooter. My point is that I don't think things are so dire that we need to optimize our recruiting to fill a need. Take the best player available, because things like three point shooting - with as much turnover as there is in college basketball - are fickle. I don't think Purvis will continue to shoot <30% from three, but if he does, merely taking those seven threes per game out of the sample and replacing them with a 35-40% guy makes the entire team far more representative. I'm not downplaying it as something that shouldn't be addressed - scouring the grad market for a sniper should be among the top priorities for the staff this off-season. But the irony is that a guy like Vance Jackson - the freshman version, that is - is [I]exactly [/I]the recruit this board wants to add to next years version, and we have a perfect case study in this years Vance to show how freshman shooters are rarely the guys to transform a team. You don't want to trick yourself into filling a one year need with a freshman when freshman are, by design, supposed to fill four year needs because they probably aren't good enough to fill a need in their first year. [/QUOTE]