Don't be upset that no SU recruits were named to McD's AA team

[dundundun]

You're misunderstanding my argument(s).
1 / It's silly to be giddier about Chris McCullough than a 3-star recruit then to say the rankings and McD status don't matter.
2 / It's silly to not feel more confident about getting a player ranked by a bunch of services as 'top 10' than about getting one in the bottom 50-100.
3 / It's silly to suggest that because rankings aren't an exact science and cite 'flameouts' as an excuse to arbitrary designate our lower-ranked guys as exempt from flameouts. Why can't you just say, 'Hey, i love these guys because they're OUR guys" and let that stand? This thread is turning into a "Oh, we didn't get into a McD game? I didn't want to anyway — it's stupid"-type of puerile whine fest. Bottom line, we wanted Wiggins. We wanted Dakari. Didn't get them. We'll play with who ever puts on the orange and we'll 'love' them. But, pretending we didn't want Wiggins or Dakari, et al, or that their acclaim isn't somehow commensurate to expected impact is just...

Is there a chance our 4-star guy, over 4 years, will have a bigger impact than Wiggins or who ever's in the McD game? Yes, absolutely. But, if you're recruiting (or playing blackjack), which odds do you play?
4 / It's not me who's saying Ennis, Roberson, Patterson aren't talented enough to play in the McD game. It's a bunch of 'talent evaluators' who have done this for years and have the resources to see these guys play more often than you or i. They're not infallible. Doesn't mean they're not a valid guide. Citing Dion is, again, cherrypicking. That's one guy, and there were 8 years before he came along. How many Top 25 Kentucky guys are drafted in the lottery? Better odds of that than finding an occasional gem.

You make very fair points. What it comes down to is this: In a perfect world, we would snab the Anthony Davis, Nerlens Noel, Andrew Wiggins type #1 recruit and/or have a class stacked with McD AAs every year. Obviously this isn't happening. At the same time (regardless of rankings) we have been bringing in great talent, fielding very good teams, and every piece of evidence points to the fact that our staff knows what they're doing and are set up to continue this current golden era of Syracuse basketball. The bottom line is that anyone who is worried about the direction of our program and/or the quality of players we are bringing in really needs to re-evaluate things.

 

[Orangezoo]

You're misunderstanding my argument(s).
1 / It's silly to be giddier about Chris McCullough than a 3-star recruit then to say the rankings and McD status don't matter.
2 / It's silly to not feel more confident about getting a player ranked by a bunch of services as 'top 10' than about getting one in the bottom 50-100.
3 / It's silly to suggest that because rankings aren't an exact science and cite 'flameouts' as an excuse to arbitrary designate our lower-ranked guys as exempt from flameouts. Why can't you just say, 'Hey, i love these guys because they're OUR guys" and let that stand? This thread is turning into a "Oh, we didn't get into a McD game? I didn't want to anyway — it's stupid"-type of puerile whine fest. Bottom line, we wanted Wiggins. We wanted Dakari. Didn't get them. We'll play with who ever puts on the orange and we'll 'love' them. But, pretending we didn't want Wiggins or Dakari, et al, or that their acclaim isn't somehow commensurate to expected impact is just...

Is there a chance our 4-star guy, over 4 years, will have a bigger impact than Wiggins or who ever's in the McD game? Yes, absolutely. But, if you're recruiting (or playing blackjack), which odds do you play?
4 / It's not me who's saying Ennis, Roberson, Patterson aren't talented enough to play in the McD game. It's a bunch of 'talent evaluators' who have done this for years and have the resources to see these guys play more often than you or i. They're not infallible. Doesn't mean they're not a valid guide. Citing Dion is, again, cherrypicking. That's one guy, and there were 8 years before he came along. How many Top 25 Kentucky guys are drafted in the lottery? Better odds of that than finding an occasional gem.

I am not missing your argument at all. Of course we wanted the big names and went after them. We have Rak, MCW, DC2 that are all burger boys. Good players yes- but without the depth and good not great recruits around them - they make no more difference than if there were similar talent guys but not burger boys. UK won the championship with burger boys as well as key upperclassmen. Dakari and Wiggins are great players. Would they have guaranteed us anything? If you are going to say our odds are 10 times better to win a title with them than with who we are getting thats foolish.

I trust the folks ranking these guys are close to accurate. But the point I was making you conveniantly avoided is that beyond the top 5 or 6 guys its a crapshoot. The guys ranked 7 - 70 all are on the same level just a quintile or two above/below. Case in point with that are guys like DC2, Fab,Rak. Good players but not home runs. I like this class because of the factors I pointed out. The only guy I think we really missed out on is Dakari - and that was a bit of bad luck with his reclassification. Otherwise we got guys we targeted who could just as easily been playing in the burger game. Lets talk in a couple years when this class is lights out and see if you still feel the same. I put my faith in the coaching staff more than I do a fellow poster ( no offense ).

 

[orange2win]

Our coaching staff are competing against the other 346 Division 1 basketball schools in America for the best talent. Although selective, we essentially grab the best we can get and we have been doing pretty well of late. Right now we have the #14, #20 and #21 rated players on our team, as well other carefully selected top 100 players. Our assets allow us to pick and choose more than most of the competition.

Are we good enough to beat Duke and UNC on a regular basis? On paper no, but with astute shopping...?? We will soon know.