[76lsjumb]

We are really only talking about a dozen players per year.  Last year there were 13 freshmen drafted by the NBA, of which exactly two were Pac-12 players (Stanley Johnson from Arizona and Kevin Looney from UCLA).  The 2014 draft featured 9 freshmen, again with two from the Pac-12 (again one each from Arizona and UCLA).  The 2013 draft had 8 freshmen, again one each from Arizona and UCLA.  I'm not going to go back the entire tenure of Dawkins' career, but it looks like one-and-dones constitute about 8 - 12 players a year, of which 2 or 3 are from the Pac-12, so even most teams that can take one-and-dones don't, and specifically about 7/8 of the NCAA field of 66 doesn't have a one and done on it.  Thus, it is a bogus argument.

BC

Clearly, the number of actual freshmen draftees is not h.uge, although it is interesting to note, from your numbers at least, that the Pac-12 apparently seems to get a higher percentage than the other conferences.  But the actual number of draftees isn't the relevant number to look at.  The relevant number is the players coming out of high school who believe they may be one-and-dones when they go through the recruiting process, regardless of whether it actually pans out that way.  It seems to me that that number is going to be higher, and perhaps significantly so, than the number who ultimately follow through on that aspiration.  And, in fact, someone who enrolls as a player with a reasonable one-and-done possibility, but who then decides to play longer, may actually turn out to be more of a benefit to the school at which he enrolls [and more of a problem for that school's opponents] -- just as winflop says -- than if he does, in fact, leave early.  The point is, however, that Stanford isn't likely to get that player, either, since he was planning on being one-and-done when he went through recruiting.

Is this the sole, or even the most important, obstacle to recruiting at Stanford?  Of course not.  But I don't think it helps...and I don't think it's bogus.

And, also, it wasn't just Dr. Tom who left Stanford [before Monty] because he didn't think it could recruit at the necessary level.  Trent Johnson said something very similar when he left ...AFTER Monty.

[76lsjumb]

We are really only talking about a dozen players per year.  Last year there were 13 freshmen drafted by the NBA, of which exactly two were Pac-12 players (Stanley Johnson from Arizona and Kevin Looney from UCLA).  The 2014 draft featured 9 freshmen, again with two from the Pac-12 (again one each from Arizona and UCLA).  The 2013 draft had 8 freshmen, again one each from Arizona and UCLA.  I'm not going to go back the entire tenure of Dawkins' career, but it looks like one-and-dones constitute about 8 - 12 players a year, of which 2 or 3 are from the Pac-12, so even most teams that can take one-and-dones don't, and specifically about 7/8 of the NCAA field of 66 doesn't have a one and done on it.  Thus, it is a bogus argument.

BC

Clearly, the number of actual freshmen draftees is not h.uge, although it is interesting to note, from your numbers at least, that the Pac-12 apparently seems to get a higher percentage than the other conferences.  But the actual number of draftees isn't the relevant number to look at.  The relevant number is the players coming out of high school who believe they may be one-and-dones when they go through the recruiting process, regardless of whether it actually pans out that way.  It seems to me that that number is going to be higher, and perhaps significantly so, than the number who ultimately follow through on that aspiration.  And, in fact, someone who enrolls as a player with a reasonable one-and-done possibility, but who then decides to play longer, may actually turn out to be more of a benefit to the school at which he enrolls [and more of a problem for that school's opponents] -- just as winflop says -- than if he does, in fact, leave early.  The point is, however, that Stanford isn't likely to get that player, either, since he was planning on being one-and-done when he went through recruiting.

Is this the sole, or even the most important, obstacle to recruiting at Stanford?  Of course not.  But I don't think it helps...and I don't think it's bogus.

And, also, it wasn't just Dr. Tom who left Stanford [before Monty] because he didn't think it could recruit at the necessary level.  Trent Johnson said something very similar when he left ...AFTER Monty.