The CardBoard
Men's BB: STAN 51 CO 69 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Men's BB: STAN 51 CO 69 (/thread-21541.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

RE: Men's BB: STAN 51 CO 69 - AlbanyCardinal - 02-13-2021

Points taken. I would defer to the coaches to make those kinds of evaluations, and, yes, I can see scenarios where it might not be advisable if there were a choice between an alternate player who could really help the team in the long run. But I'd also wager that most any 5* that has the grades to get in and was open to Stanford's recruitment would be welcome to attend Stanford -- these kinds of players don't exactly line up to play here. Good distinction made on Terry, but that he ended up as a one-and-done reflects pretty well on the coaching staff and their eye for talent. Same goes for O'Connell, who has become one of Stanford's absolute MVPs this season. Can't believe he's a first-year.

I'm okay with folks criticizing the coaching here. I'm okay with folks blaming a player's lack of development on the coaching. (I've done both myself over the years.) I can even understand some lamenting the phenomenon of one-and-dones in a general sense and preferring that Stanford stick to players that can develop over years and commit to the program as a destination and not merely a one-year stepping stone. But to second-guess the merits of bringing in someone like ZW, with his touted reputation, skill set, and potential, just b/c he didn't live up to some hype? 

(02-13-2021, 10:33 PM)Goose Wrote:  
(02-13-2021, 09:10 PM)AlbanyCardinal Wrote:  The more NBA-bound players Stanford lands, the better. Period. Even losing Tyrell Terry as early as we did has had its advantages -- recruits notice that Stanford is drawing talent that ends up signing rich contracts to play in the League. That's contagious. As for ZW, some 5* are more equipped to hit the ground running than others, but you welcome them with open arms each and every time. And even with some of his liabilities, he's a first-year still getting 12+ points/game and is obviously someone you want playing on your side. 


I understand your point. I don't agree with the "period" part. Stanford needs all the help it can get. If we have a "one and done" that can carry the team all by themselves, it is for sure worth it. Anything less has to be carefully evaluated. How many games is the guy going to win for us that we wouldn't win with an alternative player that may help develop a tight group that can be lots better next year? If we were pretty good already and had a missing piece, any way we can get that piece may be worth it. When we are not that good and possibly missing a lot of pieces it always has to be a "compared to what?" question, IMHO. It is hard to do, because with all freshmen you don't know what you are actually going to get. It is also different if it is a guy who is for sure "one and done" from day one vs a guy like Terry who only left because he had shown so much. Very different cases.