AsiaSunset
Postdoc
Posts: 4369
Reg: 11-21-04
|
10-13-17 09:24 AM - Post#233883
In response to mrjames
Mike - it's true that he is not really updated in the Rivals database and that Scout tends to mimic 247 and Verbal Commits, but he's a 3 star anyway you slice it and a high 3*** at that in ESPN's numerical rating system. In fact - there isn't much distance between Mike Wang and the two low 4**** ESPN pgs coming into the league according to ESPN analysts. I haven't seen him rated lower anywhere else. If you have, feel free to share, but there are only so many sites that do this kind of stuff.
I think the description that Jeff made earlier which defined Mike Wang as someone less than an elite athlete is correct and consistent with other things I've read and my own viewing of the limited film on him available on the Internet; nevertheless, the reigning Ivy POY was someone I'd describe as not being an elite athlete in today's hs bb recruiting world, nor would I put that tag on some excellent Penn players from the past like Tim Begley.
I also wouldn't call Spencer Freedman an elite athlete either. I watched his highlight film. Is he a very good player? Absolutely. Could he play in a better league? Absolutely. But - he's no Michael Westbrook for sure. Haven't checked out the pg Princeton got but it's possible that he might be.
I also think it's unfair to compare Wang to Jon Jaques and to assume his college career will track similarly since you clearly didn't know who Jon Jacques was as a rising senior in hs. To say the few clips we all saw remind you of Jon Jaques as a senior at Cornell is fine, but Jaques was a guy who really went virtually unnoticed until his senior year in college. We are looking at a 17 year old. Plus - Mike Wang is already a lot bigger at either 6-9 or 6-10 and likely to get a lot stronger as he matures.
Why can't you just be gracious? You had to put down Columbia's 4**** recruit last year instead of just leaving well enough alone. I know you talk to people (who actually go way beyond where they should go in sharing certain types of confidential information), but those same people make repeated incorrect talent evaluations for their own teams. Certainly you have more guys at your alma mater who came in as very hyped and have been either disappointed or reduced to minimum roles. Look at Zena. We all thought he was going to dominate the league. It didn't quite work out that way although he had his moments. And - there are a bunch of others. Then you have coaches like Henderson and Jones who've constructed championship teams with guys with less stars than guys who barely get off of Harvard's bench.
Penn needed a versatile big and a wing player in this class. Right now I'd say we've been successful in completing 50% of the mission.
I agree that there remains some distance between Y,H, and Pr and the rest of the league, but I think Penn and some other Ivies will give them a run for their money. Last year a very imperfect Penn team beat Harvard at home, Yale in New Haven and took Princeton to OT at the Palestra. I'm not saying that the gap will close this year because I still don't know much about the team we will put on the floor, both in Nov and by the start of the league season. But - I don't think anyone at Penn or the other Ivies looks at Y,H or Pr as someone they can't compete with, if not over a 14 game season, then absolutely on any particular night.
|
