I responded to this:
"Top 100 guys can play big roles, can be studs, etc. in their freshman year."
Would you equate 15 mpg and producing pretty well to "play big roles, can be studs"?
All of this discussion based on their high school rank is driving me nuts. Clearly, if you are a top 10 player then things are different.
For example. my memory tells me that Luther Head was somewhere between 100 and 150. Don't we all wish that we would have a young
Luther Head on next year's team. These rankings have nothing to do with, learning, experience, and growth, in other words, everything
our coaching staff is trying to develop with these young kids. Everybody like number categories, but they can be the most inaccurate and
misleading measure of talent that exists. It is what the player does with it that is critical. No argument, I would love it if all of our players
were top 100, but life is not always that simple. Granted highly rated incoming talent that is willing to work hard is a great situation, but the
key is "willing to work hard."