Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="billsin01, post: 2040137, member: 837"] I'm not sure where they are ranked is what I was getting at -- not that this is necessarily a response to me. But my point was more that, wherever they are ranked, they are getting good players who aren't so good that they're gone quickly. It's certainly a delicate balance, and maybe basically impossible to predict but as frustrating as Paige might have been or whatever Jackson's or Hicks' limitations are, they are really solid players and would be huge to have on your roster for four years (of even three, for that matter). Bottom line for me, we somehow need to find a way to get at least a season of high-end production out of our recruits. I'm fine with ennis, for example, who put up 12 and 5.5 while running the show well, grabbing a few boards, playing OK on d -- that's an excellent season. Richardson, on the other hand, is the type of guy you'd love to get year 2 out of. His season was OK -- similar basic numbers but much lower PER and just generally much more inconsistent. Some nights when he was lights out, some nights where he was invisible. I'm not upset with his leaving and I'm thrilled with a final four, but getting the justin jackson junior season is a huge difference -- so much more consistent and efficient -- and that's after a sophomore year that comped fairly well with Richardson, including a final four run (obviously one more game). To put it simply -- we got to dream on the potential of richardson but only saw hints of it (3.3 win shares) while we saw a good deal of what Ennis was ever going to be (5.5 win shares). Can you predict that? I'm not sure but I'm pretty sure these coaches are capable of accurately judging how much polish a player has and that has to equate roughly to how quickly they can produce (even if it's at the expense of how much upside they have). [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?