Your summary lacks context. If what you are saying is that Wake will not be able to recruit two or three McD AAs every year like Duke, Carolina and Kentucky, then I agree with you with an asterisk - when Coach K steps down there is an opening for someone to take that spot.
How does my summary lack context? I cited all players ranked in the top 25 per position and included the four star prospects that weren't ranked in the top-25. I don't know what more context I can give you given what data is there. When I get some spare time, I can further contextualize that with some "where are they now," but that'll have to wait.
On to your next point: Coach K being at Duke for 30 years is context enough . That job will be filled by the best of the best, whenever he retires. Whether it is Brad Stevens, Josh Pastner, Mark Few, Jeff Capel, Tommy Amaker, etc. Furthermore, ACC coaches are good recruiters. Turgeon and Bennett are new, but K, Roy, Hamilton (pulled in 5 stars for 4 years in a row!), Greenberg (seriously, look it up. he's the worst of the four conference vets, but he's had some great classes recently). My point? The ACC has always recruited well. Wake has been at the top of the second tier for a very long time and I don't expect that to change anytime soon. I'm fine with that expectation because that's how we do.
But I take exception with the way you've zipped up recruits. CP3 was an elite recruit yes, but he zipped up the recruiting board from Top 50 player to top 5 player AFTER he accepted a scholly. Ditto for Teague and Johnson. Only Aminu has been a truly elite recruiting win. Every other commit you can basically chalk up to Battle being there early and seeing what few saw.
Speaking of context... Actually, I'll let RJ's posts speak for themselves regarding CP3. I don't know where you were, but dude was recruited by everybody the outlets' list and more. We had an advantage, sure, but no more or less than any other school near elite talent. Did John Wall go to the triangle schools? Did Lance Stephenson go to St John's? Heck, did Kyle Anderson go to Seton Hall? That was a recruiting coup no matter how you look at it. Recruiting local talent is never a sure thing, but it's something that Wake has been very good at over the last 10 years. If you had seen Reggie Johnson in HS then you'd understand why he wasn't exactly a top priority.
Teague and Johnson both committed to Wake after their recruitments were heating up. Wake may have had an advantage by starting early, but the big guns were after both. If I'm wrong, then please let me know. Same goes for Ty Walker and Tony Woods. For as cynical as I am about Wake basketball, I give Dino and Jeff serious credit for those commitments.
Big E absolutely fulfilled expectation. He was a dominant college center for two seasons and he had a very good sophomore year despite being undersized and having to figure out how to stay out of foul trouble. Under every definition he met expectations.
I am going to reconsider my previous statement. After looking over top-5 centers in each class since 2002, I think we did pretty well. I just wish that he learned to go straight up with the ball around the basket and that he was a better rebounder... His senior season was the most disappointing that I've experienced but, I'll admit when I'm wrong.
The bottom bottom line is that finding elite college players is a crapshoot. You sift through the top 125 players in each class to find guys whom you think can fit with what you got and can do the class work. Some of those guys exceed expectation, some meet them, and some don't put it together.
(skip to)
So, with those facts, Wake can compete at the highest level. But we do not have any wiggle room and when we get an Ari instead of a Josh Howard, or a Walker instead of a Big E, then we are going to struggle. Same can be said for all but about 4 or 5 programs nationally though.
Well, hopefully that's what that culture change means... And, I'm going to disagree with you. Duke players are generally good kids, even when they bust. They don't have (visible, team hindering) problems like we did. At least not for awhile. It's always been my philosophy that the best four star players are better than the worst five star players. My logic is that there's usually a non-talent reason that a guy is ranked so low and, no matter what it is, it's almost always some sort of gamble (skinny, raw, intangibles, grades, etc.). Elite programs get their pick and it's always interesting to see who Kentucky, Duke, and Carolina don't recruit (Rodney Purvis comes to mind). This has to mean something, right? I guess we'll find out.
