WARNING: Long Post
I have a real belief that many coaches, fans, etc do not understand the concept of recruiting to team build.
I have some examples I want to give here and hopefully people will read my post and discuss these things here with me.
So watching the Iowa-IU game last might sparked a thought in my head about recruiting rankings.
Here are the rankings of some star freshmen from around the conference who all play similar positions out on the wing.
So, as you see, Romeo Langford is rated much higher than the other 4 wings. However, Romeo Langford is a very likely one and done. So, even though he was very highly rated, he only helps for one year and has to be immediatelt replaced.
The other 4 all offer very good freshman seasons as well(some have even been better than Romeo Langford), but also appear to be multiple year players.
The question Im hoping will be debated here is this:
Who is really a more valuable recruit - Romeo Langford for one year or Wieskamp/Ayo/Henry/Muhammed for multiple years?
I genuinely feel like Henry will have a much better year for MSU later in his career than Romeo is having for an IU team that doesnt even appear tournament bound.
I genuinely feel like Iowa got the much better recruit in Wieskamp over Langford simply because they are similarly good(one could argue Wieskamp may have been better this year even) but Iowa gets multiple years, plus the growth that comes with that, while Indiana gets one freshman year of Langford, and the inexperience that comes with that.
Painter recently said - "You cant grow them if you cant keep them."
I believe he is onto something here. What, exactly, does one single five star one and done freshman offer a program if he isnt paired with other multiple 5 star one and done freshmen?
If Ayo Dosunmu leaves Illinois after this year, what exactly did Illinois benefit from having him? They arent making the tournament and now have to replace him.
If Romeo Langford leaves Indiana after tjis year, what exactly did Indiana benefit from having him? They arent making the tournament and now have to replace him.
On the other hand, Iowa and Ohio State have their Shooting guards for the future all while playing them major minutes and developing them along the way
Joe Wieskamp and Luther Muhammed should both be better and have a larger impact next year than Romeo was this season for Indiana, right?
I know on the surface this seems like a troll thread, but I think it's an interesting philosophical difference in IU recruiting Romeo Langford and then having to replace him next year as opposed to Iowa recruiting Jow Wieskamp, getting very good production this year, and both keeping and growing him next year as well.
What would or how would a single, random one and done help Purdue as opposed to a Trevion Williams type?
Would Purdue be better off or worse off RIGHT NOW if they had landed a flasy 5 star oad guard in Carsens class instead of him? A flashy 5 star OAD center in HAARMS class instead of him?
Seems unlikely to me.
Thoughts and/or Prayers?