Jump to content

A dream deferred...


Recommended Posts

Puh-lease. Never did I say that they are likely to have similar careers. I said that they could have similar careers. The fact of the matter here is that Ross is an elite level recruit. He was being recruited some of the top programs in the nation. That's a fact.

Also, you're not taking into account the fact that Ross is still a junior while Stephenson is a full year older. Ross is ranked in the 40s right now, I believe. It is very possible, especially playing at Montrose for Vetter, that Ross improves his ranking and even gets into the top 25. In an article I read somewhere (sorry I don't have a link), Vetter said that he think Ross could be a top 20 prospect by the time his high school career is all said and done.

I'll take 3 or 4 years of a quality kid in Ross about 100 times a week over character-issue Stephenson for one year. I don't think that the different between them is a large as some people think.

Also, people are forgetting to mention what this means to MD's local recruiting base. Not only did we score an elite prospect, but we grabbed an elite local prospect. People have really been hounding Gary for missing out on the local high school guys. Well, he did his job well this time. Hopefully this signing will send a message that MD is back when it comes to recruiting in the MD/D.C/ NoVa area. Also, I like the trend of Montrose kids coming to MD. Bowie, Vasquez, Ross (others I'm missing?) They're usually quality kids who were well coached in high school and played against elite level talent before college. It's a really good relationship to have.

Puh-lease yourself. And the Orioles could win the AL East next year--they won't....but they could.

If Stephenson was coming here you'd be swooning.

Ross may--may--get into the top 20...Stephenson was always a top, prospect in his class. Stephenson, at worst, will be drafted in the top 20 (by his Sophmore year)...there's a strong likelihood Ross won't event get drafted. They're not even in the same league...not even close.

And the rest of this drivel is pointless...I never said Ross was a bad sign (said he was good multiple times), never said Gary screwed up this class, never said I was angry he didn't go local...

But to sit here and tell me you'd rather have a top 75 SF over a potential 1 & done, lottery-after-their-freshman-year talent is ludicrous. If I presented you with either of these two options at the beginning of the year...you'd be all over Stephenson.

This entire post is reviosionist homerism. Anyone who tells me they'd rather have a Ross-talent over a Stephenson-talent is absolutely clueless.

And you said "very well could" btw....big difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Im just gonna come out and say it: I think Stephenson is overrated and a big product of hype. I've watched him play a little and he isn't all that. He's 6'7 with a pretty good handle which allows him to get shots off over smaller guards and finish at the rim against guys his size. He isn't particularly quick and has an inconsistent jumper. He'll be a good college player but he isn't a Derrick Rose, Tyreke Evans, Beasley, Durant, Mayo type of impact player at the college level. I'm willing to bet he isn't a lottery pick in next year's NBA draft and I wouldn't be suprised at all to see Ross become the better overall player as their career's progress. If I'm wrong on Stephenson I'll admit it but right now I ain't buying the hype at all.

And you've scouted Ross? Or do you just assume that Ross' write-ups are accurate and Stephenson's are not? Because you wont find a single scout to agree with you.

What would your "scouting report" be if Lance was on the verge of signing with us....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know when or why this turned into a Stephenson v Ross debate. Maryland could get both. Stephenson is a one-and-done guy, and I'd love to have him, adding him to a solid team makes us a legit Sweet-16 team and a potential Final-4 team if things go really well. Disappointing that it doesn't look like its gonna happen, though.

But Ross is an elite prospect in his own right, and many experts believe he'll be a top-20 or higher rated player by this time next year. If you're ignoring that, then you aren't being objective. He's a great recruit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you've scouted Ross? Or do you just assume that Ross' write-ups are accurate and Stephenson's are not? Because you wont find a single scout to agree with you.

What would your "scouting report" be if Lance was on the verge of signing with us....

Keep buying the Lance hype. We'll have to wait and see, I know one thing I'm defintely going to tell you so if I'm right.

My scouting report would be the same. I said he'll be a good college player and I'll happily take him and root for him if he verbals to Maryland. Doesn't change my opinion of his game one bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know when or why this turned into a Stephenson v Ross debate. Maryland could get both. Stephenson is a one-and-done guy, and I'd love to have him, adding him to a solid team makes us a legit Sweet-16 team and a potential Final-4 team if things go really well. Disappointing that it doesn't look like its gonna happen, though.

But Ross is an elite prospect in his own right, and many experts believe he'll be a top-20 or higher rated player by this time next year. If you're ignoring that, then you aren't being objective. He's a great recruit.

You're right. And I didnt want this to be a Stephenson/Ross debate. I'm coming off as a Ross-basher, and I'm not.

However, "you're forgetting about Ross" was the popular counterargument to my lament that we seem to be at square 1 when it comes to landing bonafide, immediate program-changing talent.

I standby the claim that Ross is not that type of talent--very few are--and I'm disappointed that Maryland was unable to leverage the Dixon-years into the ability to secure that type of talent fairly consistently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep buying the Lance hype. We'll have to wait and see, I know one thing I'm defintely going to tell you so if I'm right.

My scouting report would be the same. I said he'll be a good college player and I'll happily take him and root for him if he verbals to Maryland. Doesn't change my opinion of his game one bit.

Well I'll keep your scouting report on file...what with your sterling track record and renowned analytical ability and what not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Stephenson was coming here you'd be swooning.

You're right. I would be excited. Like I said, Ross and Stephenson could end up doing similar things. Any time MD gets a big time player, I'm going to be excited. I don't have anything against Stephenson, I just don't think that he's as good as some people say he is. That doesn't mean I think he's bad, or that I don't want him. I just wanted Ross more.

And, I wouldn't say that the rest of my "drivel" was pointless. It just wasn't in response to you. I was just pointing out some of the other important things that go along with the Ross signing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you're qualified to evaluate the talents of Lance and Ross....how?

I'm not. But I guarantee you that most scouts not named CCBird would take Lance. Not really sure I'm going out on a limb here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Puh-lease yourself. And the Orioles could win the AL East next year--they won't....but they could.

If Stephenson was coming here you'd be swooning.

Ross may--may--get into the top 20...Stephenson was always a top, prospect in his class. Stephenson, at worst, will be drafted in the top 20 (by his Sophmore year)...there's a strong likelihood Ross won't event get drafted. They're not even in the same league...not even close.

And the rest of this drivel is pointless...I never said Ross was a bad sign (said he was good multiple times), never said Gary screwed up this class, never said I was angry he didn't go local...

But to sit here and tell me you'd rather have a top 75 SF over a potential 1 & done, lottery-after-their-freshman-year talent is ludicrous. If I presented you with either of these two options at the beginning of the year...you'd be all over Stephenson.

This entire post is reviosionist homerism. Anyone who tells me they'd rather have a Ross-talent over a Stephenson-talent is absolutely clueless.

And you said "very well could" btw....big difference.

You're kind-of being an ass here. I don't happen to agree with Mackus that we're enough of a lock to be a sweet-16 team/Final Four team next year with Stephenson that he'd be a better fit than a multi-year commitment from Ross. That's just my own take on where the team stands now, its weaknesses, and any upgrade that we think would be presented by having Stephenson around.

Honestly, I'm not clueless and the insults you're tossing around reveal you as the immature little reactionary you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're kind-of being an ass here. I don't happen to agree with Mackus that we're enough of a lock to be a sweet-16 team/Final Four team next year with Stephenson that he'd be a better fit than a multi-year commitment from Ross.
Again, why make the comparison? It doesn't have to be an either/or at all.

We could get a commitment from Stephenson, be a top-10 team next year, then bring in Ross as a sterling piece to head our class the next year when Vasquez, Stephenson, Milbourne, and Hayes all leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, why make the comparison? It doesn't have to be an either/or at all.

We could get a commitment from Stephenson, be a top-10 team next year, then bring in Ross as a sterling piece to head our class the next year when Vasquez, Stephenson, Milbourne, and Hayes all leave.

I'm not promoting a comparison. I'm trying to clarify my original remark, which was that it seemed a strange time to complain about recruiting when there were readily evident signs that the four year recruiting malaise had passed.

I made the comment that I would prefer multiple years from Ross over one year from Stephenson - which isn't a reflection of any comparison of ability on a 1:1 scale, as I mentioned, but simply an acknowledgment that I think the program needs a multi-player reboot/re-build and one year doesn't get us that far.

That's why - for me - the Ross news would be better than the Lance news. Lance is a mercenary. Getting a commitment from him only shows that we paid his price (not literally, of course. No accusations.) Getting Ross (and even Stoglin) shows us - as fans - that we're recruiting nationally, and we're recruiting in person, in depth.

I was trying to further contextualize my comments - which have been characterized as "absolutely clueless" when they're pretty obviously not.

Lance is not a no-brainer. He's a talent-upgrade, but at a position that's already our strength. Minutes for him likely means moving Milbourne back to PF and diminished minutes for Moseley and Hayes.

I'd - personally - prefer to take our lumps a bit next year with the frosh front line (w/ some minutes going to Landon there, and at the 3). With Moseley getting serious minutes at the 2-3 so that he can be ready to play a more prominent role in two years.

That's all. I think any use of Stephenson for a one-year run with Vasquez is potentially at the expense of long-term success. Further, Lance isn't Carmelo or even O.J. Mayo.

Because of this, I prefer Ross to Stephenson. And that doesn't even take into account my skepticism about what Lance brings to the team as a personality - something I imagine, from having read your posts for years, that you discount more than I'm inclined to. That's fine - I don't have a problem with it. We just weigh that differently.

That's it. I've not once said I think Ross is a better player/prospect than Stephenson. It's just a question of a one-year rental, and how much better that makes us now v. the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not promoting a comparison. I'm trying to clarify my original remark, which was that it seemed a strange time to complain about recruiting when there were readily evident signs that the four year recruiting malaise had passed.

I made the comment that I would prefer multiple years from Ross over one year from Stephenson - which isn't a reflection of any comparison of ability on a 1:1 scale, as I mentioned, but simply an acknowledgment that I think the program needs a multi-player reboot/re-build and one year doesn't get us that far.

That's why - for me - the Ross news would be better than the Lance news. Lance is a mercenary. Getting a commitment from him only shows that we paid his price (not literally, of course. No accusations.) Getting Ross (and even Stoglin) shows us - as fans - that we're recruiting nationally, and we're recruiting in person, in depth.

I was trying to further contextualize my comments - which have been characterized as "absolutely clueless" when they're pretty obviously not.

Lance is not a no-brainer. He's a talent-upgrade, but at a position that's already our strength. Minutes for him likely means moving Milbourne back to PF and diminished minutes for Moseley and Hayes.

I'd - personally - prefer to take our lumps a bit next year with the frosh front line (w/ some minutes going to Landon there, and at the 3). With Moseley getting serious minutes at the 2-3 so that he can be ready to play a more prominent role in two years.

That's all. I think any use of Stephenson for a one-year run with Vasquez is potentially at the expense of long-term success. Further, Lance isn't Carmelo or even O.J. Mayo.

Because of this, I prefer Ross to Stephenson. And that doesn't even take into account my skepticism about what Lance brings to the team as a personality - something I imagine, from having read your posts for years, that you discount more than I'm inclined to. That's fine - I don't have a problem with it. We just weigh that differently.

That's it. I've not once said I think Ross is a better player/prospect than Stephenson. It's just a question of a one-year rental, and how much better that makes us now v. the future.

Ok, no complaints from me with any of that. I don't really think adding Stephenson this year would really risk any long-term success, especially since all our leadership is leaving after this year anyways, but if you're arguing that adding him might limit how much of a leadership role someone like Bowie, Tucker, or Mosley can take on next year and could continue to assume down the road, its hard to argue against that possibility.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, no complaints from me with any of that. I don't really think adding Stephenson this year would really risk any long-term success, especially since all our leadership is leaving after this year anyways, but if you're arguing that adding him might limit how much of a leadership role someone like Bowie, Tucker, or Mosley can take on next year and could continue to assume down the road, its hard to argue against that possibility.

That's all. It's like EJF gets the "value" argument, but doesn't get that there a couple different timelines at work.

Maximizing short-term benefits rarely maximizes long-term benefits.

What I will admit is that I haven't accounted for the wildcard that a talent like Lance might put us on the map for other Lance-like talents. I think it's a hard argument, tough to prove. And one I'm less inclined to make due to my (admitted) bias against one-and-done guys.

I think leadership is one component of it. But also just the minutes. We need Bowie on the court a lot. Tucker on the court a lot. And Moseley on the court pretty much all the time. Combined with serious minutes for at least one of Padgett or Williams - but hopefully both.

I've tried not to denigrate EJF's passion for Stephenson - or EJF himself. But his failure to even acknowledge the real world costs and benefits of bringing Lance in just goes to show that he is what we thought he was.

And his tone in this thread is just one more bit of evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...