Posted by tkimble on 4/18/2013 12:37:00 PM (view original):
This is what high-high potential is for. I've been a huge proponent of recruiting for high-high potential. Some of the guys I've had drafted: #200 Center, #105 PG, no-star international center, #80 SF, #70 SF, #89 SG, #52 C, #90 PF. I just had a completely unranked center lead the nation in scoring and become first team all-american for a big 6 school.
Also, of your examples: Tony Mitchell was the #12 player in the country (rivals), so probably not the best example, the others are good examples. I guess what I'm trying to say, recruiting in WIS is definitely not an exact science and just like in real life, you have to dig deep to find the gems.
+1. The randomness is there in a positive way. I had a player improve by 60 points in perimeter, and I know I'm not the only one. Recently I even had a guy improve 40+ in bh and passing!
I would be ****** if I spent a large portion of my recruiting budget on a guy that is a complete bust. I would feel ripped off and since I am a customer, that would be a bad move for WiS.
I've also had guys get injured and, because I'm a bad coach, I've had players become ineligible. These are both negative aspects that can be seen as a player becoming a bust. I lost one player whom I promised a start as a freshman for all but five games his fish man year. Since, he came in with a low WE that first year of starting was crucial to his development. Player wasn't a bust but he sure could have been better.