[chimera]

I don't disagree with your overall point and find your analysis of recruiting helpful.  I do think one big difference is that aside from last season, our F4 teams had superstar talent that was ranked top 5 coming in.  My take on recruiting rankings has always been that the key is at the very, very top, like top 5.  The players that everyone identifies as potential stars usually turn out to be stars in college.  Not all do, of course, but when you look at POY candidates nationally, most were top recruits coming in.  Our top 5 players recently were players like Appel, Pedersen, both Ogwumikes.  When you dip down even a little in the recruiting rankings things become much less certain.  Someone ranked in the 10-25 range is probably very good, but not always, and once you start getting down into the below 25 range it becomes a crap shoot, with stuff like how well the recruit fits the program, much more important.  We've had some very good players in the 10-25 range like Tinkle, Ruef, and Pohlen, who was better than her incoming ranking, but we've had some players in that range who did not contribute that much and were never stars.  Sara James was ranked 18th I believe by I think HoopGurlz at that time.  Rooks was something like 20th (maybe you have her exact ranking above, while typing I am too lazy to check).  Right now we have a few players in the 10-15 range, which is great, but none in the top 5, and that does matter.  It seems to take longer for players other than the superstars to get rolling.

How players develop, the timing, is tricky.  Ruef was a goofy turnover machine for the first couple of years but turned into a really great player late in her career, for instance.  Bird did not play much her first two years, though we could see potential, and blossomed as a junior and senior.  One difference from now is those players had people in front of them.  We don't know if they would have developed faster if they played more earlier.  I really like our young players overall and expect them to be inconsistent - that is the nature of things.  Dodson and Williams have a ton of potential.  Wilson does as well.  Jerome has had some really good games, though not as a scorer and not so much lately.  Carrington has surely improved a lot and has a bright future.  I could go on.  The thing is there is no guarantee any of these players make the jump to be consistent stars, though all could be. 

I admit to some confusion about what is going on with Fingall.  She did so well filling in for Kaylee last season, but tailed off late last year.  Before the season I read some quotes from coaches that she was much improved.  So far she has played little and has not made the leap I hoped to see.  I really wonder what's going on there. 

[chimera]

I don't disagree with your overall point and find your analysis of recruiting helpful.  I do think one big difference is that aside from last season, our F4 teams had superstar talent that was ranked top 5 coming in.  My take on recruiting rankings has always been that the key is at the very, very top, like top 5.  The players that everyone identifies as potential stars usually turn out to be stars in college.  Not all do, of course, but when you look at POY candidates nationally, most were top recruits coming in.  Our top 5 players recently were players like Appel, Pedersen, both Ogwumikes.  When you dip down even a little in the recruiting rankings things become much less certain.  Someone ranked in the 10-25 range is probably very good, but not always, and once you start getting down into the below 25 range it becomes a crap shoot, with stuff like how well the recruit fits the program, much more important.  We've had some very good players in the 10-25 range like Tinkle, Ruef, and Pohlen, who was better than her incoming ranking, but we've had some players in that range who did not contribute that much and were never stars.  Sara James was ranked 18th I believe by I think HoopGurlz at that time.  Rooks was something like 20th (maybe you have her exact ranking above, while typing I am too lazy to check).  Right now we have a few players in the 10-15 range, which is great, but none in the top 5, and that does matter.  It seems to take longer for players other than the superstars to get rolling.

How players develop, the timing, is tricky.  Ruef was a goofy turnover machine for the first couple of years but turned into a really great player late in her career, for instance.  Bird did not play much her first two years, though we could see potential, and blossomed as a junior and senior.  One difference from now is those players had people in front of them.  We don't know if they would have developed faster if they played more earlier.  I really like our young players overall and expect them to be inconsistent - that is the nature of things.  Dodson and Williams have a ton of potential.  Wilson does as well.  Jerome has had some really good games, though not as a scorer and not so much lately.  Carrington has surely improved a lot and has a bright future.  I could go on.  The thing is there is no guarantee any of these players make the jump to be consistent stars, though all could be. 

I admit to some confusion about what is going on with Fingall.  She did so well filling in for Kaylee last season, but tailed off late last year.  Before the season I read some quotes from coaches that she was much improved.  So far she has played little and has not made the leap I hoped to see.  I really wonder what's going on there.