Realistic 2025 Recruiting Class?
- Thread starter WhiskeyCityCat
- Start date
There wasn't A star, they had 5 guys average double digits in points, they would take turns being THE star different games or all of them was pretty close in scoring during games. In the tournament, especially when the lights was the brightest, he shined as evidenced by the 16/11 against SD State in the Sweet 16 (leading rebounder), 21/5 (leading scorer) in the Final 4 against Alabama, and 15/5 in the championship game (second leading scorer). Role players doesn't have as many big games and get drafted 4th overall in the NBA draft. They just don't. UCONN had 5 guys that took turns being THE star and he was the highest drafted of them all. That is not a "role" player. Best defender and drew the top player from the opposing team and was a very big reason UCONN cut down the nets. If he was needed to score a bunch, he did, if he was needed to rebound, he did, if he was needed to shut down the opposing teams scorer, he did.
Your definition of role player is just different than mine. You act like it’s a bad thing to play a role on a team. He played a valuable role on the team, but wasn’t the star. That’s a role player. UConn was a team of stars that played their roles. So they were all stars that were also role players. That’s a good thing to have.
By that definition, ALL 5 starters was role players. They all took turns being the star. There really wasn't a "star", rather than 5 go to guys. He was drafted 4th overall, NOT a role player. A role player is someone who defers to the best players on the team and does the little things to help win games. Is not a player depended on game in and game out to lead the team and doesn't command a team to game plan against them, they would be the player a team would try to have them beat them. Castle was far from that, he was a focal point for teams to try and shut down, not to mention the defensive contributions he provided game in and game out. You simply do not get drafted 4th in the NBA draft by being a role player. Someone like Thiero is a role player, decent contributor, but not depended upon by his team to make plays and win games.
Like I have said multiple times, our definitions of role player and star are different.
Have a great day, brother.
Good debate, appreciate the back and forth discussion. What is your definition of a role player ? I gave you mine, if you don't mind.
Excellent debate.
My definition of a role player is someone who plays a role or maybe several roles on the team that doesn’t necessarily have to be the focal point of the offense or have the ball in his hands all the time or take a bunch of shots every game.
UConn had a team full of guys that played their role perfectly, and they didn’t really have a star.
Even the best freshmen are generally role players on teams good enough to win it all today; and Castle was a role player at UConn. He also wasn’t the PG – he was a SF who needed/needs time to develop his game and particularly his shot. He was the least impactful player on the starting five through most of the year. To his credit, Castle did get better as the season wore on – which is what should happen. He’s got plenty of potential in the years ahead.
But where Castle was drafted is irrelevant to how impactful he was in college. It’s comparing apples to oranges. Recruiting services rank high school players on pro potential, not necessarily how well they think the player will impact winning as a freshman in college (or in college at all, since they anticipate that the top ranked high schoolers are expected to be OAD). That comes from the recruiting services, not me surmising how they’re ranking players. The NBA teams are also mostly drafting on projection, not what the player is today. The NBA already has a ton of good players. They’re looking for the home-run ball with the draft, not another solid player. It’s why freshmen and overseas teenagers are routinely picked ahead of older players who are presently much better players, but the older players are not perceived to have the same upside.
None of this means I think Castle wasn't valuable for UConn. It's kind of like I would say about Teague for us in 2012 - which is that there were a number of better upperclassmen options on paper, but it's hard to argue with winning.
UConn 2024 was a lot like UK 1998 in that regard. No real star power, but high-level pro-level play at each position.
Similar threads
