Soooo...

Altman has a pitch. Tinkle has a pitch. My kid couldn't make the freshman team in his high school, so I've never heard either pitch, but I bet it goes something like this:

Altman, "I'm going to set you loose, push your tempo, and showcase your talents for the NBA."
Tinkle, "I'm going to work you hard, teach you to communicate, and develop your skills for the NBA - and life."

Let's face it - most five-star guys are going to prefer the first pitch. A lot of three- and four- star guys will, too. But Tinkle is being true to who he is, and I'm cool with that.

Yep, if you're waiting for OSU to start reeling in 5* recruits, you might as well get comfortable because it is going to be a long wait. If you figure there are 25-30 five-star recruits annually and 10 to 15 each year go to KY, Duke, Kansas, AZ, NC, MSU, and UCLA as a group; well that doesn't leave much for anyone else. The large majority of those left go to schools that have had recent success (especially in tourney) and Oregon is certainly one of those schools. Add in the great facilities and its not surprising they're in the running for 5*s. I wouldn't be surprised if no 5* recruit comes to Oregon St. in my lifetime. And for there to be the chance that one does, we have to have some sustained success. Doesn't help either that 5* recruits don't exactly grow on trees in the state of Oregon. Heck 4*s don't either.

As to stars mattering or not mattering, of course I'd want a team full of 5* players. But once you start moving down the recruit rankings how much difference is there between a mid-4* and a high 3*? In 2015, the two teams I follow closely -- Illinois and Oregon St. -- both had classes with three 4* recruits. Illinois' recruits had rankings of 37, 78, and 114, while OSU's were 62, 82, and 140. Though lower ranked, in retrospect the Beavers class with Thompson, Tinkle and Eubanks has been far better than Illinois'. U of I's top recruit was a contributor as a freshmen, regressed as a sophomore and has now transferred; second recruit wasn't a contributor at all first two years and has now transferred, third recruit hasn't been a contributor at all yet, and though he might be in the rotation this year he isn't expected to be a large contributor (hope I'm wrong there). The best player in that Illinois class has turned out to be a 3* ranked 228. Sure this might be considered cherry-picking and all things being equal I'd rather have higher rated recruits, but once you get past the top tier of players and start moving down the rankings, rankings and stars become less and less predictive of the future -- especially the further down you go. Can you make a living on 3* recruits in a Power 5 conference? Sure you can, but it doesn't leave a lot of room for mistakes. But you can certainly get into the tourney on a consistent basis with a mixture of three and four star recruits.

We have 4* Jack Wilson coming in with the class of 2018. I hope we can add one more 4* player to this class. With Eubanks, Trinkle, the 2 Thompsons, JM, and some places had Hollins as a 4*, we've got a growing list of 4* players.

Oops! haha