[Goose]

I think drawing conclusions about "one and done" players at Stanford based on a sample size of 1 is a bad idea. It may may be that Haase made a bad choice in the particular guy he recruited. It is not a given that a "one and done" will be a disruptive force. It is also a risk that he might be. He is also taking a slot that has an opportunity cost. That has to be properly weighted with how good you think the player will be. It isn't a simple or easy task. I wouldn't recommend basing a program on the ability to recruit 5* players at Stanford, but it may be there are situations when it makes sense. It didn't work this time. Haase may have learned enough to do better in the future, or he may have learned it just won't work at Stanford.

[Goose]

I think drawing conclusions about "one and done" players at Stanford based on a sample size of 1 is a bad idea. It may may be that Haase made a bad choice in the particular guy he recruited. It is not a given that a "one and done" will be a disruptive force. It is also a risk that he might be. He is also taking a slot that has an opportunity cost. That has to be properly weighted with how good you think the player will be. It isn't a simple or easy task. I wouldn't recommend basing a program on the ability to recruit 5* players at Stanford, but it may be there are situations when it makes sense. It didn't work this time. Haase may have learned enough to do better in the future, or he may have learned it just won't work at Stanford.