[OutsiderFan]

Stanford is generally speaking replacing the key departures with players that were either as highly ranked or more highly ranked recruits than those they are replacing, and there is more depth of talented athletes with the potential to become real (good) players from which to choose than at any time in program history.

The corollary is that you need to look at upside as much as immediate perceived value.  That means it's likely the case that some new players could struggle a bit early on, but over the course of a season, better athletes have higher upsides to ultimately make the team better.  Even with the losses of Murphy, Gardner, Mauro, and Skov, Stanford has the raw material to be very good in 2014, and the coaching in the program is held in high regard.  This is what the analysts know, and why Stanford is being projected as a pre-season Top 5 team once again.

The other thing to keep in mind is other teams have to replace key guys every year too.  Everyone here seems to expect a more dynamic Stanford offense in 2014, but even if the offense were about the same in 2014, I don't think there is a whole lot of reason to think the defense will slip very much.  In fact, it may even be a bit more dynamic (create more turnovers), with the addition of explosive defenders like Kalambayi, Shittu, and Watkins, plus maybe some more quickness at CB if Lyons is moved to FS as seems to make a lot of sense.

I may be wrong, but I see Kalambayi, Shittu, and Palma as being potentially monster players for Stanford, and think Watkins will make an impact too.  And of course, the offense will be more explosive in 2014 as well, so why shouldn't Stanford be given the benefit of the doubt after four 11+ win seasons  in a row?

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford is generally speaking replacing the key departures with players that were either as highly ranked or more highly ranked recruits than those they are replacing, and there is more depth of talented athletes with the potential to become real (good) players from which to choose than at any time in program history.

The corollary is that you need to look at upside as much as immediate perceived value.  That means it's likely the case that some new players could struggle a bit early on, but over the course of a season, better athletes have higher upsides to ultimately make the team better.  Even with the losses of Murphy, Gardner, Mauro, and Skov, Stanford has the raw material to be very good in 2014, and the coaching in the program is held in high regard.  This is what the analysts know, and why Stanford is being projected as a pre-season Top 5 team once again.

The other thing to keep in mind is other teams have to replace key guys every year too.  Everyone here seems to expect a more dynamic Stanford offense in 2014, but even if the offense were about the same in 2014, I don't think there is a whole lot of reason to think the defense will slip very much.  In fact, it may even be a bit more dynamic (create more turnovers), with the addition of explosive defenders like Kalambayi, Shittu, and Watkins, plus maybe some more quickness at CB if Lyons is moved to FS as seems to make a lot of sense.

I may be wrong, but I see Kalambayi, Shittu, and Palma as being potentially monster players for Stanford, and think Watkins will make an impact too.  And of course, the offense will be more explosive in 2014 as well, so why shouldn't Stanford be given the benefit of the doubt after four 11+ win seasons  in a row?