[AlbanyCardinal]

I'm more concerned with Haase's player development, scheme, and use of personnel than his recruiting, which I now see as the only bright spot in his coaching. I know you think ZW has been a disappointment that reflects poorly on Haase's recruiting; to me, it reflects poorly on his coaching and use of players. No coach in the country would have passed on ZW. He's whiffed on a few guys and has struggled to land good post players, but otherwise his recruiting has been surprisingly good, imo.

No question that the college basketball landscape is more challenging to Stanford than it was a couple decades ago.  However, I believe that there is a group of academically admissible players that could wind up being college contributors for 3 - 4 years which could form the nucleus of a Stanford resurgence, but I think it will take a different style of recruiting and talent evaluation than Haase has pursued.

BC

[AlbanyCardinal]

I'm more concerned with Haase's player development, scheme, and use of personnel than his recruiting, which I now see as the only bright spot in his coaching. I know you think ZW has been a disappointment that reflects poorly on Haase's recruiting; to me, it reflects poorly on his coaching and use of players. No coach in the country would have passed on ZW. He's whiffed on a few guys and has struggled to land good post players, but otherwise his recruiting has been surprisingly good, imo.

No question that the college basketball landscape is more challenging to Stanford than it was a couple decades ago.  However, I believe that there is a group of academically admissible players that could wind up being college contributors for 3 - 4 years which could form the nucleus of a Stanford resurgence, but I think it will take a different style of recruiting and talent evaluation than Haase has pursued.

BC