This is hindsight bias, but if staff knew ML was going to be back - which for a time seemed at least very uncertain - is it possible they may have approached recruitment of '17 bigs differently?
Asking in context that with ML in the fold, the need for a big next year seems so narrow and attainable if planning for it. Just solid, nothing spectacular, which seems to be driving a lot of the frustration around here. Not as easy later in the game however as we are seeing.
Hasahn French's name mentioned a few times recently, and seemed like his name first started popping up frequently around this time last year. Seems like he's exactly the type of guy we are looking for right now.
Did staff opt for higher risk/higher upside in Brown thinking they might need to chase more impact production, especially if ML was moving on? Realize there's a lot of speculation there, and that there is something to be said for recruiting and getting commitments from the best kids you can. Just seems like there was so much uncertainty with Brown from the start that there was risk of it, unfortunately, falling through one way or another.
Maybe we'll get close to French with Kante (although I have little idea how similar their projections are) and this will be moot. But curious if staff knew they'd have the top 6 they do going into next year, notably including ML, if they'd have looked to secure a big with more probability even if giving up some upside.
